First results, for USB vs NFS (baseline == USB, set1 == NFS) :
http://eesprit.free.fr/openelec.tv/iozone/usb_vs_nfs/
As you can see, NFS performs better, or as well as my local USB drive (an old 250GB disk) most of the time, with the exception of the f* function.
You can see that both are limited by RAM size used to buffer/cache (my zbox has 2GB, 512MB are reserved for GPU, and XBMC + openelec stuff is using a little less than 512MB, which let about 1GB for cache/buffers).
I didn't run iozone with the -c option to force NFS function to take in count the close() function.
Will do that later, I don't really understand the point of this option for now.
My conclusion : NFS is almost as performant as an old local drive (in my setup), the differences are not huge, so in terms of user-experience, it should not have any real impact.
iSCSI tests are running at the moment.
http://eesprit.free.fr/openelec.tv/iozone/usb_vs_nfs/
As you can see, NFS performs better, or as well as my local USB drive (an old 250GB disk) most of the time, with the exception of the f* function.
You can see that both are limited by RAM size used to buffer/cache (my zbox has 2GB, 512MB are reserved for GPU, and XBMC + openelec stuff is using a little less than 512MB, which let about 1GB for cache/buffers).
I didn't run iozone with the -c option to force NFS function to take in count the close() function.
Will do that later, I don't really understand the point of this option for now.
My conclusion : NFS is almost as performant as an old local drive (in my setup), the differences are not huge, so in terms of user-experience, it should not have any real impact.
iSCSI tests are running at the moment.