I was configuring some iSCSI disk on a Windows server and noticed there were two different options available that seem to provide similar functionality and I had to know… What’s the difference?
THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MCS AND MPIO (IN A NUTSHELL):
First we agree upon the common features within both technologies: both serve a multipathing for (iSCSI) I/O-operations utilizing multiple hardware (or OSI Level 1) components, such as Ethernet NICs or iSCSI HBAs. The purpose of multipathing is redundancy and aggregation – how this is implemented depends on the above depicted figures, i.e. through the decision which paths are active and which are passive (or standby, using Microsoft parlance). For the exact definition of the policies, such as round robin, weighted path, fail over only, etc. please refer to “MS iSCSI UG”, p. 41.
Finally here come the condensed definitions for both technologies:
MCS allows the initiator to establish multiple TCP/IP connections to the same target within the same iSCSI session.
MPIO in contrast allows the initiator to establish multiple iSCSI sessions (each having single TCP/IP connection) to the same target, effectively aggregating the duplicate devices into a single device.
If you are not familiar with the terminology (initiator, target, session, connection, initiator port and network portal) please refer to “Multivendor Post” which provides very informative sketches to the iSCSI network architecture.
Now that we know that MCS means effectively several connections within a session and MPIO means multiple sessions the question is when to use what. Mainly you will have to concentrate on two perspectives – vendor support and load balance policy inheritance. The question – or rather schools of thought – about the speed and performance differences are factored out here, because in the author’s opinion these are almost equal and you will probably never get to the point of fully utilizing them. With this said consider the following simple rule of thumb: you can use MCS only when it is supported from the vendor’s SAN and you are not using hardware iSCSI HBAs. In any other case use MPIO. The second thought is – if considering the above conditions you are able to use MCS, but want to apply different load balancing policies to different targets (and effectively LUNs or groups of LUNs) you will still be better off using MPIO. This is because load balancing policies are session adherent. In other words when you are applying policy to MCS it is for the whole session, no matter how many connections are aggregated “beneath” it. On the other side when using MPIO you can set different policies for different LUNs, because the multipathing is using different iSCSI sessions.
I’m still trying to wrap my hear around exactly what the source is getting at. But will update the blog when I do some more testing.