Page 1 of 1

Initiator future

Posted: Mon Feb 09, 2015 12:21 pm
by velis
I understand that you guys discontinued the initiator. I suppose in favour of MS built-in initiator?

Well, I'm a home user and I'm considering iSCSI to centralise storage. However, I have grown accustomed to SSD disks and would like to have SSD-like performance even on remote drives.
I have been testing iSCSI for a while now and while performance is far from abysmal, it is still orders of magnitude slower than SSD.

Question:
You already support caching for server side. Would you be willing to consider continuing initiator development in order to build-in the cache logic?

It is always preferable to have both ends from the same provider and your VirtualSAN is looking really fine so far.

Thank you for your consideration,
Jure

Re: Initiator future

Posted: Wed Feb 11, 2015 9:02 am
by anton (staff)
Yes, forced to replace our own with MSFT initiator... Long list of reasons.

Technically you don't need caching being monolithic part of a complex driver: it can be a stand-alone component in the storage stack working with a referenced MSFT initiator for example.

While in theory we could do that I doubt we will: I don't see this a sellable product and NT kerne developers time is expensive... Sorry about that!
velis wrote:I understand that you guys discontinued the initiator. I suppose in favour of MS built-in initiator?

Well, I'm a home user and I'm considering iSCSI to centralise storage. However, I have grown accustomed to SSD disks and would like to have SSD-like performance even on remote drives.
I have been testing iSCSI for a while now and while performance is far from abysmal, it is still orders of magnitude slower than SSD.

Question:
You already support caching for server side. Would you be willing to consider continuing initiator development in order to build-in the cache logic?

It is always preferable to have both ends from the same provider and your VirtualSAN is looking really fine so far.

Thank you for your consideration,
Jure