Note: "permalinks" may not be as permanent as we would like,
direct links of old sources may well be a few messages off.
On 16/06/13 18:47, Luca Fornasari wrote: > On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 6:44 AM, cesar <brain at click.com.py > <mailto:brain at click.com.py>> wrote: > > > And about DRBD over a direct connection in mode round robin, can > you give me > links or comments about this case? (This is very important for me > because I > will lose connection speed if I change of balance-rr to > active-backup). > > > https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/networking/bonding.txt > balance-rr: This mode is the only mode that will permit a single > TCP/IP connection to stripe traffic across multiple > interfaces. It is therefore the only mode that will allow a > single TCP/IP stream to utilize more than one interface's > worth of throughput. This comes at a cost, however: the > striping generally results in peer systems receiving packets out > of order, causing TCP/IP's congestion control system to kick > in, often by retransmitting segments. > The problem is you have out of order packets and it doesn't help if > you start to play around with net.ipv4.tcp_reordering sysctl parameter > because there will always be a chance to have out of order packets. > Ordered packets are indeed fundamental to DRBD. > In DRBD world the bonding driver is used to achieve HA using > active/backup or 802.3ad. Neither of which will boost your performance > (802.3ad can improve performance if and only if you have a great > number of TCP connections but that's not the case with your DRBD > scenario). > Hi, It was my understanding that this was only the case if switches were involved, and especially different switches. When you have 2 (or more ports) on one machine connected via crossover cables to another server with an equal number of ports (obviously), and you configure both sides with RR, then all packets should arrive in order. Since packet 1 is sent on eth0, and packet 2 on eth1 from server 1 Server 2 will receive packet 1 on eth0 and packet 2 on eth1 in the same order. If you had switch1 between the two machines on eth0, and switch2 between the machines on eth1, then it is very possible the switch will introduce different amounts of delay, therefore causing out of order packets. At least, this was my understanding after some recent detailed reading/research into these matters. If this is still wrong, even for a set of direct cross over connections, please educate both me and the OP. Regards, Adam -- Adam Goryachev Website Managers www.websitemanagers.com.au -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.linbit.com/pipermail/drbd-user/attachments/20130617/602cc33c/attachment.htm>