Sorry if this is covered elsewhere.
I know the Linux Bonding FAQ is supposed to talk about this, but I
didn't see anything specific in it on what parameters to use.
Basically, I want to bond two GigE ports between two servers which are
connected with straight cables with no switch and use them fo
On 2011-08-09 16:46, Herman wrote:
> Sorry if this is covered elsewhere.
>
> I know the Linux Bonding FAQ is supposed to talk about this, but I
> didn't see anything specific in it on what parameters to use.
>
> Basically, I want to bond two GigE ports between two servers which are
> connected wi
On 09.08.2011 16:46, Herman wrote:
Also, right now I'm using "mode=active-backup". Would one of the
other modes allow higher throughput and still allow automatic failover
and transparency to DRBD?
Try round-robin in your situation, it is the only bonding mode that
gives higher throughput f
> On 2011-08-09 16:46, Herman wrote:
> > Sorry if this is covered elsewhere.
> >
> > I know the Linux Bonding FAQ is supposed to talk about this, but I
> > didn't see anything specific in it on what parameters to use.
> >
> > Basically, I want to bond two GigE ports between two servers which are
10, 2011 1:04:11 PM
Subject: Re: [DRBD-user] Directly connected GigE ports bonded together no
switch
> On 2011-08-09 16:46, Herman wrote:
> > Sorry if this is covered elsewhere.
> >
> > I know the Linux Bonding FAQ is supposed to talk about this, but I
> > didn'
On 10.08.2011 19:04, Herman wrote:
If this is the case, maybe arp monitoring is more reliable for direct
connections since NIC failure (which may fail but still have link up) is
more likely than cable failure? Maybe I don't have a good understanding
of this.
With switches in between, ARP monit
On 08/10/11 19:04, Herman wrote:
On 2011-08-09 16:46, Herman wrote:
Sorry if this is covered elsewhere.
I know the Linux Bonding FAQ is supposed to talk about this, but I
didn't see anything specific in it on what parameters to use.
Basically, I want to bond two GigE ports between two servers
- Original Message -
> From: "Bart Coninckx"
> To: drbd-user@lists.linbit.com
> Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 3:34:48 PM
> Subject: Re: [DRBD-user] Directly connected GigE ports bonded together no
> switch
>
> On 08/10/11 19:04, Herman wrote:
> &g
On Wed, 10 Aug 2011 17:20:12 -0400 (EDT) Jake Smith wrote:
[Huge snip]
>
>
> I tuned my MTU setting on the direct link bond to 9000 and saw a 10%
> improvement on throughput. Negligible on latency though.
>
> I was getting consistent 180-185MB/s using the throughput testing script
> in the DRB
- Original Message -
> From: "Christian Balzer"
> To: drbd-user@lists.linbit.com
> Sent: Friday, August 12, 2011 12:58:11 AM
> Subject: Re: [DRBD-user] Directly connected GigE ports bonded together no
> switch
>
>
> On Wed, 10 Aug 2011 17:20:12 -0400
10 matches
Mail list logo