Wed, 17 Apr 2019 10:47:32 +0200 Paul Emmerich <paul.emmer...@croit.io> ==> Lars Täuber <taeu...@bbaw.de> : > The standard argument that it helps preventing recovery traffic from > clogging the network and impacting client traffic is missleading:
What do you mean by "it"? I don't know the standard argument. Do you mean separating the networks or do you mean having both together in one switched network? > > * write client traffic relies on the backend network for replication > operations: your client (write) traffic is impacted anyways if the > backend network is full This I understand as an argument for separating the networks and the backend network being faster than the frontend network. So in case of reconstruction there should be some bandwidth left in the backend for the traffic that is used for the client IO. > * you are usually not limited by network speed for recovery (except > for 1 gbit networks), and if you are you probably want to reduce > recovery speed anyways if you would run into that limit > > Paul > Lars _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@lists.ceph.com http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
