On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 10:43:03AM +1100, Adi Pircalabu wrote: > On 2018-10-20 02:16, Bryan K. Walton wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 04:47:53PM +1100, Adi Pircalabu wrote: > > > > > > Why aren't you using Ethernet bonding? > > > > Thanks Adi, > > > > We are rethinking our network configuration. We may do our replication > > through a directly cabled and bonded connection, and bypass our > > switches. This would simplify our drbd configuration. > > Bryan, > You can use active/passive bonding as already suggested, or even LACP if you > switches support it. For the replication link, though, if you've only two > nodes, removing the switch(es) from the mix and going back to back using > LACP is a sensible option, even if only for removing the switch as a point > of failure.
I know you know, but for the record, if this was not only about redundancy, but also hopes to increase bandwidth while all links are operational, LACP does not increase bandwidth for a single TCP flow. "bonding round robin" is the only mode that does. Just saying. -- : Lars Ellenberg : LINBIT | Keeping the Digital World Running : DRBD -- Heartbeat -- Corosync -- Pacemaker DRBD® and LINBIT® are registered trademarks of LINBIT __ please don't Cc me, but send to list -- I'm subscribed _______________________________________________ drbd-user mailing list drbd-user@lists.linbit.com http://lists.linbit.com/mailman/listinfo/drbd-user
