Performance: IDE versus SCSI controller

J

Jarryd

Hi all,

In Hyper-V, is there any performance gain in using the IDE controller over
the SCSI one, or vice versa? I know that the system partition has to be
IDE. In reality all vhds will be sitting on a 1.2TB SAS RAID 5 array, so
the physical environment is SCSI. I was just wondering if the virtual
environment mimicked more than just the configurable capabilities (e.g. 16
devices on one SCSI channel, actually 64 on the Hyper-V ones I see, and only
2 on IDE) of the two interface types. Is there also a performance diffence
between the two virtual interfaces.

Thanks,

Jarryd
 

My Computer

J

Jarryd

Hi all,

I found my answer. The IDE driver is better than the emulated ones used
before, but it is not better on performance than the synthetic SCSI
controller. So use SCSI controller for speed, bearing in mind it can't be
used as your boot partition.

Cheers,

Jarryd

"Jarryd" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]

> Hi all,
>
> In Hyper-V, is there any performance gain in using the IDE controller over
> the SCSI one, or vice versa? I know that the system partition has to be
> IDE. In reality all vhds will be sitting on a 1.2TB SAS RAID 5 array, so
> the physical environment is SCSI. I was just wondering if the virtual
> environment mimicked more than just the configurable capabilities (e.g. 16
> devices on one SCSI channel, actually 64 on the Hyper-V ones I see, and
> only 2 on IDE) of the two interface types. Is there also a performance
> diffence between the two virtual interfaces.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jarryd
 

My Computer

C

Charlie Russel - MVP

Not true. They are the same under the hood, and have the same performance.
The advantages to SCSI are the quantity, and in R2 you get hot add/remove.

--
Charlie.
http://msmvps.com/blogs/russel




"Jarryd" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]

> Hi all,
>
> I found my answer. The IDE driver is better than the emulated ones used
> before, but it is not better on performance than the synthetic SCSI
> controller. So use SCSI controller for speed, bearing in mind it can't be
> used as your boot partition.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Jarryd
>
> "Jarryd" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]

>> Hi all,
>>
>> In Hyper-V, is there any performance gain in using the IDE controller
>> over the SCSI one, or vice versa? I know that the system partition has
>> to be IDE. In reality all vhds will be sitting on a 1.2TB SAS RAID 5
>> array, so the physical environment is SCSI. I was just wondering if the
>> virtual environment mimicked more than just the configurable capabilities
>> (e.g. 16 devices on one SCSI channel, actually 64 on the Hyper-V ones I
>> see, and only 2 on IDE) of the two interface types. Is there also a
>> performance diffence between the two virtual interfaces.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Jarryd
>
 

My Computer

J

Jarryd

Hi,

Sorry, my bad. I totally misread this blog:
http://blogs.technet.com/jhoward/archive/2007/10/04/boot-from-scsi-in-virtual-server-vs-boot-from-ide-in-windows-server-virtualization.aspx

Cheers,

Jarryd

"Charlie Russel - MVP" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]

> Not true. They are the same under the hood, and have the same performance.
> The advantages to SCSI are the quantity, and in R2 you get hot add/remove.
>
> --
> Charlie.
> http://msmvps.com/blogs/russel
>
>
>
>
> "Jarryd" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]

>> Hi all,
>>
>> I found my answer. The IDE driver is better than the emulated ones used
>> before, but it is not better on performance than the synthetic SCSI
>> controller. So use SCSI controller for speed, bearing in mind it can't
>> be used as your boot partition.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Jarryd
>>
>> "Jarryd" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]

>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> In Hyper-V, is there any performance gain in using the IDE controller
>>> over the SCSI one, or vice versa? I know that the system partition has
>>> to be IDE. In reality all vhds will be sitting on a 1.2TB SAS RAID 5
>>> array, so the physical environment is SCSI. I was just wondering if the
>>> virtual environment mimicked more than just the configurable
>>> capabilities (e.g. 16 devices on one SCSI channel, actually 64 on the
>>> Hyper-V ones I see, and only 2 on IDE) of the two interface types. Is
>>> there also a performance diffence between the two virtual interfaces.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Jarryd
>>
>
 

My Computer

Top