There is another thread in the ML right now covering this exact topic. The general consensus is that for most deployments, a separate network for public and cluster is wasted complexity.
On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 9:59 AM Jake Young <jak3...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 1:07 PM Ronny Aasen <ronny+ceph-us...@aasen.cx> > wrote: > >> On 15.11.2017 13:50, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote: >> >> As 10gb switches are expansive, what would happen by using a gigabit >> cluster network and a 10gb public network? >> >> Replication and rebalance should be slow, but what about public I/O ? >> When a client wants to write to a file, it does over the public network >> and the ceph automatically replicate it over the cluster network or the >> whole IO is made over the public? >> >> >> >> public io would be slow. >> each write goes from client to primary osd on public network, then is >> replicated 2 times to the secondary osd's over the cluster network, then >> the client is informed the block is written. >> since cluster network would see 2x write traffic compared to public >> network when things a OK. and many times the traffic of the public network >> when things are recovering or backfilling. i would prioritize the >> clusternetwork for the highest speed if one could not have 10Gbps on >> everything. >> > > > I would seriously consider combining the cluster and public network. It > will simplify your configuration. It really takes a lot to saturate a 10G > network with Ceph. > > If you find that you need to separate your public and cluster networks > later, you can do that in the future. > > Jake > >> _______________________________________________ > ceph-users mailing list > ceph-users@lists.ceph.com > http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com >
_______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@lists.ceph.com http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
