Note: "permalinks" may not be as permanent as we would like,
direct links of old sources may well be a few messages off.
On 27/09/13 15:32, Arnold Krille wrote: > Hi, > > On Thu, 26 Sep 2013 08:33:02 +0000 Andreas Mock > <andreas.mock at drumedar.de> wrote: >> I couldn't find a definitiv answer for my question: Which >> ethernet bonding modes are supported for the DRBD interconnect? >> I found the following in >> http://www.drbd.org/users-guide-8.4/s-prepare-network.html >> "[...] and the bonding driver (in active-backup mode) is >> recommended [...]" Does this mean: When you use the recommended >> bonding than you HAVE to use active-passive? > > I did some experiments with bonding two 1G links. As expected > active-passive gives you fallback even when the two links go from > machine to two (interconnected) switches. With that you can wire > both nodes to both switches, interconnect the switches and get a > setup the works even if one switch or one cable stops working. > balance-rr only works on directly connected machine, switches get > confused about the mac-addresses hopping between ports. And then > your switches are so busy updating their arp-tables that they > can't route the data anymore. When you really want to use two links > from machine to switch to machine, you have to use LACP so each > component knows what to do. > > In the end I stopped my experiments and choose active-passive > bonding across two switches for the main interface and balance-rr > for the direct 2x10G-link. Now its up to the various > drbd-resources (~20 on last count) to max out 20G bandwidth. > > Hope that helps. > > Have fun, > > Arnold In my testing, I found the same. Only mode=1 was reliable in all failure and recovery scenarios I tested. If you choose any other mode, be sure to test the failure and recovery of links and switches. -- Digimer Papers and Projects: https://alteeve.ca/w/ What if the cure for cancer is trapped in the mind of a person without access to education?