This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
Home Products Support Community News


Re: [Xen-users] XCP, NFS for storage and bonded NICs

To: Steve Thompson <smt@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-users] XCP, NFS for storage and bonded NICs
From: Bart Coninckx <bart.coninckx@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 23:23:35 +0100
Cc: Craig Miskell <craig.miskell@xxxxxxxxxx>, xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Mon, 01 Nov 2010 15:24:55 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <alpine.LRH.0.9999.1011011806390.8985@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-users-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen user discussion <xen-users.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-users@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-users>, <mailto:xen-users-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-users>, <mailto:xen-users-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <4CCDFC2C.700@xxxxxxxxxx> <201011012301.23786.bart.coninckx@xxxxxxxxxx> <alpine.LRH.0.9999.1011011806390.8985@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: KMail/1.13.5 (Linux/; KDE/4.4.4; x86_64; ; )
On Monday 01 November 2010 23:14:22 Steve Thompson wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Nov 2010, Bart Coninckx wrote:
> > This is what I do as well, except by either not using a switch (direct
> > links like for DRBD) or by using two seperate ones. If I understand
> > correctly, balance-rr spoofs MAC addresses which will confuse the
> > connected switch. Anyway, it goes nice speed results. I do have to tweak
> > tcp_reordering though in my SLES machines. If I don't, I hardly get more
> > speed than a single link.
> Interesting. My balance-rr setup for DRBD uses two dedicated GbE links
> between two Intel cards on each of two Dell PE2900 servers, straight
> through with no switches, and using MTU=9000. I have had no problems with
> packet reordering at all (all tcp parameters are stock). I _do_ see some
> out of order packets, of course, but the counts are very small. An iperf
> test between the two systems gives 1.97 Gb/sec. I'm using CentOS 5.5
> x86_64.
> In different applications, I use balance-rr with two links to a single
> Dell 48-port switch. No problems with that either, although it is less
> traffic.
> Steve

That's odd, than the switch in some way must understand the mode 0 bonding ...

Silly question maybe: but where do you see the out of order packet count?



Xen-users mailing list