[Gluster-users] Interesting experiment

[Moore, Michael]

Part of the performance loss is that you cannot get the full 4 Gbit of bandwidth between 2 hosts.  Usually you are limited to the throughput of a single link between 2 hosts.  And if you are using a round-robin method of bonding, then you run into performance losses due to TCP packets coming in out of order.

- Mike

-----Original Message-----
From: gluster-users-bounces at gluster.org [mailto:gluster-users-bounces at gluster.org] On Behalf Of Mickey Mazarick
Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2009 4:19 PM
To: Nathan Stratton
Cc: gluster-users at gluster.org
Subject: Re: [Gluster-users] Interesting experiment

Just a note we initially tried to set up our storage network with bonded 
4 port gig E connections per client and storage node and it was still 
~1/3 the speed of infiniband.  There also appears to be more overhead in 
unwrapping data from packets even with jumbo frames set.

We did see about a 50% increase in throughput with 2 bonded gig ports, 
but not double the speed that you would expect. Make sure you use a 
trunking mechanism and not an active/passive configuration.

-Mic


Nathan Stratton wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Aug 2009, Hiren Joshi wrote:
>
>> Is it worth bonding? This look like I'm maxing out the network
>> connection.
>
> Yes, but you should also check out Infiniband.
>
> http://www.robotics.net/2009/07/30/infiniband/
>
>
>> <>
> Nathan Stratton                                CTO, BlinkMind, Inc.
> nathan at robotics.net                         nathan at blinkmind.com
> http://www.robotics.net                        http://www.blinkmind.com
> _______________________________________________
> Gluster-users mailing list
> Gluster-users at gluster.org
> http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users

_______________________________________________
Gluster-users mailing list
Gluster-users at gluster.org
http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users