[ovirt-users] Ovirt nodes NFS connection

[Tal Bar-Or]

Thanks all for your answer, it's more clear now

On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 7:24 PM, FERNANDO FREDIANI <
fernando.frediani at upx.com> wrote:

> Hello Tal
>
> It seems you have a very big overkill on your environment. I would say
> that normally 2 x 10Gb interfaces can do A LOT for nodes with proper
> redundancy. Just creating Vlans you can separate traffic and apply, if
> necessary, QoS per Vlan to guarantee which one is more priority.
>
> If you have 2 x 10Gb in a LACP 802.3ad Aggregation in theory you can do
> 20Gbps of aggregated traffic. If you have 10Gb of constant storage traffic
> it is already huge, so I normally consider that Storage will not go over a
> few Gbps and VMs another few Gb which fit perfectly within even 10Gb
>
> The only exception I would make is if you have a very intensive (and I am
> not talking about IOPS, but throughput) from your storage then may be worth
> to have 2 x 10Gb for Storage and 2 x 10Gb for all other networks
> (Managment, VMs Traffic, Migration(with cap on traffic), etc).
>
> Regards
> Fernando
>
> 2018-03-21 16:41 GMT-03:00 Yaniv Kaul <ykaul at redhat.com>:
>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 12:41 PM, Tal Bar-Or <tbaror at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello All,
>>>
>>> I am about to deploy a new Ovirt platform, the platform  will consist 4
>>> Ovirt nodes including management, all servers nodes and storage will have
>>> the following config:
>>>
>>> *nodes server*
>>> 4x10G ports network cards
>>> 2x10G will be used for VM network.
>>> 2x10G will be used for storage connection
>>> 2x1Ge 1xGe for nodes management
>>>
>>>
>>> *Storage *4x10G ports network cards
>>> 3 x10G for NFS storage mount Ovirt nodes
>>>
>>> Now given above network configuration layout, what is best practices in
>>> terms of nodes for storage NFS connection, throughput and path resilience
>>> suggested to use
>>> First option each node 2x 10G lacp and on storage side 3x10G lacp?
>>>
>>
>> I'm not sure how you'd get more throughout than you can get in a single
>> physical link. You will get redundancy.
>>
>> Of course, on the storage side you might benefit from multiple bonded
>> interfaces.
>>
>>
>>> The second option creates 3 VLAN's assign each node on that 3 VLAN's
>>> across 2 nic, and on storage, side assigns 3 nice across 3 VLANs?
>>>
>>
>> Interesting - but I assume it'll still stick to a single physical link.
>> Y.
>>
>> Thanks
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Tal Bar-or
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Users mailing list
>>> Users at ovirt.org
>>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Users mailing list
>> Users at ovirt.org
>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>>
>>
>


-- 
Tal Bar-or
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ovirt.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20180325/e53dd0d0/attachment.html>