[DRBD-user] Is it worth considering eth bonding in this setup?

Luca Lesinigo luca at lm-net.it
Mon Dec 22 18:21:06 CET 2008

Note: "permalinks" may not be as permanent as we would like,
direct links of old sources may well be a few messages off.


Hello there.
I'm a long time happy user of drbd - many thanks for the great work!

I have a two node setup with two SMP servers, two S-ATA each, two  
gigabit each. One gigabit is the public network to internet, and the  
other one is a crossover between the two nodes carrying drbd data and  
internal (lan) traffic. I have the obvious setup with a primary drbd  
device on each node mirrored on the corresponding drive on the other  
node. FYI, I run lvm2 on the drbd devices and use logical volumes for  
Xen paravirtualized guests. I don't need live migration so I prefer  
the flexibility lvm between drbd and xen.

Now I'm adding a 2x gigabit card in each node (Intel PRO/1000MT pci- 
x). The current LAN port will be connected to a switch to create a LAN  
for internal traffic between the two and other servers. The two dual- 
gigabits will be crossed between the two nodes and will carry drbd  
traffic (w/ jumbo frames).

The simplest setup would be one drbd device per gigabit link. I use  
"normal" 7200rpm s-ata disks, not fancy 15k rpm ones or other strange  
things. I use the latest stable 8.0.x release.

Is there any reason why I should consider a bonding setup with both  
drbd devices on the bonded link? Would you recommend such a setup?
Talking about availability, I don't see any reason why I should loose  
only one of the two links... performance-wise, I think the gigabit  
link and a single 7200rpm sata disk should be more or less leveled.

Also, I'm going to do some RTFM on this, but do you recommend any  
special drbd setting to make best use of the direct gigabit link with  
jumbo frames?

Many thanks,
--
Luca Lesinigo



More information about the drbd-user mailing list