So this envir consist of linux dating back to rhel3~rhel7 and windows dating back to 95 ~ w7, it's almost 50% linux 50% windows. I got a fileserver and I am am stuck with
1) between linux vs windows fileserver.
2) Whether my fileserver should be virtual of physical
3) If i were to make my fileserver virtual, should I mount the VM to a physical storage and have machines accessing files via the vm? or just create a really big virtual disk for the vm and have other machine accessing the files? What are the performance implication if I were to do either way?
Edit: I do not have a san, I only have one machine for the fileserver atm. (the fileserver is backed up by arcserve so don't worry XD).
Design 1. I have machineA with 24tb of storage, i'm going to put centos 7 in it, file system is going to be btrfs. Then I am going to create a vm(from other machine or same machine via kvm, doesn't matter) that mounts it's storage on machineA. All the client machines (windows/linux) is going to accessing the VM as if its the fileserver.
Design 2. install exsi/hyper-v or centos7/kvm on machineA. Create a VM with a big virtual storage, then have all the clients access it.
Design 3: make machineA the traditional fileserver, have windows/centos7 installed on it, fileshare it and call it a day.
Base on the design I listed, what do you suggest and how's the performance difference between all 3 of the design.
[link] [comments]