bond or different networks for frontend and backend
Hello, here in the description (https://www.ovirt.org/documentation/gluster-hyperconverged/chap-Single_node_...) 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
On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 10:40 AM jb <jonbae77@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello,
here in the description ( https://www.ovirt.org/documentation/gluster-hyperconverged/chap-Single_node_...)
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?
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.
Best regards
Jonathan
_______________________________________________ Users mailing list -- users@ovirt.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@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/P5ZLQLG2TZN56I...
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@gmail.com> написа: Hello, here in the description (https://www.ovirt.org/documentation/gluster-hyperconverged/chap-Single_node_...) 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@ovirt.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@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/P5ZLQLG2TZN56I...
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@gmail.com> написа:
Hello,
here in the description (https://www.ovirt.org/documentation/gluster-hyperconverged/chap-Single_node_...) 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@ovirt.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@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/P5ZLQLG2TZN56I...
You can find details here: https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_enterprise_linux/7/htm... 1 or layer3+4 — Uses upper layer protocol information (when available) to generate the hash. This allows for traffic to a particular network peer to span multiple slaves, although a single connection will not span multiple slaves. Best Regards, Strahil Nikolov В вторник, 24 ноември 2020 г., 15:29:50 Гринуич+2, jb <jonbae77@gmail.com> написа: 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@gmail.com> написа:
Hello,
here in the description (https://www.ovirt.org/documentation/gluster-hyperconverged/chap-Single_node_...) 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@ovirt.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@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/P5ZLQLG2TZN56I...
Users mailing list -- users@ovirt.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@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/C5OPQLQBF7BM4F...
participants (3)
-
Alex K -
jb -
Strahil Nikolov