On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 10:40 AM jb <jonbae77(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: In terms of performance and stability, it is better to assign one NIC for ovirtmgmt (frontend web, management net) + 3 nics in bond for the gluster storage network. You could also assign the migration network at same bond. Though I personally prefer to not mix gluster net with migration.

Sorry I hear this hashing term the first time. So in cockpit this would be a team with 802.3ad LACP / Passive? And you would put all 4 nics in this team? In the switch I still have to define a link aggregation (on hp switch a trunk) with LACP? Am 24.11.20 um 13:36 schrieb Strahil Nikolov: > If I had 4 x 1GBE , I would consider LACP with hashing on layer 3+4. > > For production use, I would go with 10GBE at least. > > Best Regards, > Strahil Nikolov > > > > > > > В вторник, 24 ноември 2020 г., 10:40:22 Гринуич+2, jb <jonbae77(a)gmail.com&gt; написа: > > > > > > Hello, > > here in the description > (https://www.ovirt.org/documentation/gluster-hyperconverged/chap-Single_no...) > it says that we should have at least 2 interfaces to separate frontend > and backend traffic. > > How is this when I have 4 nics and I make with all one bond interface, > is this not better in terms of performance? What is your recommendation > with 4 x 1Gbit nics? > > Best regards > > Jonathan > > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list -- users(a)ovirt.org > To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave(a)ovirt.org > Privacy Statement: https://www.ovirt.org/privacy-policy.html > oVirt Code of Conduct: https://www.ovirt.org/community/about/community-guidelines/ > List Archives: https://lists.ovirt.org/archives/list/users@ovirt.org/message/P5ZLQLG2TZN...