A blog by Jose Barreto, a member of the File Server team at Microsoft.
All messages posted to this blog are provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confer no rights.
Information on unreleased products are subject to change without notice.
Dates related to unreleased products are estimates and are subject to change without notice.
The content of this site are personal opinions and might not represent the Microsoft Corporation view.
The information contained in this blog represents my view on the issues discussed as of the date of publication.
You should not consider older, out-of-date posts to reflect my current thoughts and opinions.
© Copyright 2004-2012 by Jose Barreto. All rights reserved.
Follow @josebarreto on Twitter for updates on new blog posts.
Question received via e-mail:
Is it practical use SMB3 storage without RDMA or do we have a use case for production rather than development or test?I thought RDMA would be essential for production deployment of Hyper-V SMB storage.
RDMA is not a requirement for the Hyper-V over SMB scenario.The most important things that RDMA can give you are lower latency and lower CPU utilization.
To give you an idea, without RDMA, I was able to keep a single 10GbE port busy in a 16-core/2-socket Romley system using a little over 10% of the CPU. For many, using 10% of the CPU is OK in this case. With RDMA, it dropped to less than 5% of the CPU. Those become much more important if you are using very high bandwidth, like multiple 10GbE, 40GbE (Ethernet) or 54GbIB (InfiniBand).In those cases, without RDMA, you could end up using much more of your CPU just to do network IO. Not good.
To make a better estimate of your requirements, you need to consider:
With that we can think of the expected load on the CPU and on the network, and how important using RDMA would be.