[Gluster-users] Gluster and bonding
Jorick Astrego
jorick at netbulae.eu
Mon Feb 25 14:24:09 UTC 2019
Hi,
Have not measured it as we have been running this way for years now and
haven't experienced any problems with "transport endpoint is not
connected” with this setup.
We used the default options "BONDING_OPTS='mode=6 miimon=100'"
|miimon=/time_in_milliseconds/ |
Specifies (in milliseconds) how often MII link monitoring
occurs. This is useful if high availability is required because
MII is used to verify that the NIC is active.
On 2/25/19 2:22 PM, Martin Toth wrote:
> How long does it take to your devices (using mode 5 or 6, ALB is
> prefered for GlusterFS) to take-over the MAC? This can result in your
> error - "transport endpoint is not connected” - there are some
> timeouts within gluster set by default.
> I am using LACP and it works without any problem. Can you share your
> mode 5 / 6 configuration ?
>
> Thanks.
> Martin
>
>> On 25 Feb 2019, at 13:44, Jorick Astrego <jorick at netbulae.eu
>> <mailto:jorick at netbulae.eu>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Well no, mode 5 and mode 6 also have fault tollerance and don't need
>> any special switch config.
>>
>> Quick google search:
>>
>> https://serverfault.com/questions/734246/does-balance-alb-and-balance-tlb-support-fault-tolerance
>>
>> Bonding Mode 5 (balance-tlb) works by looking at all the devices
>> in the bond, and sending out the slave with the least current
>> traffic load. Traffic is only received by one slave (the "primary
>> slave"). If a slave is lost, that slave is not considered for
>> transmission, so this mode is fault-tolerant.
>>
>> Bonding Mode 6 (balance-alb) works as above, except incoming ARP
>> requests are intercepted by the bonding driver, and the bonding
>> driver generates ARP replies so that external hosts are tricked
>> into sending their traffic into one of the other bonding slaves
>> instead of the primary slave. If many hosts in the same broadcast
>> domain contact the bond, then traffic should balance roughly
>> evenly into all slaves.
>>
>> If a slave is lost in Mode 6, then it may take some time for a
>> remote host to time out its ARP table entry and send a new ARP
>> request. A TCP or SCTP retransmission tents to lead into ARP
>> request fairly quickly, but a UDP datagram does not, and will
>> rely on the usual ARP table refresh. So Mode 6 /is/ fault
>> tolerant, but convergence on slave loss may take some time
>> depending on the Layer 4 protocol used.
>>
>> If you are worried about fast fault tolerance, then consider
>> using Mode 4 (802.3ad aka LACP) which negotiates link aggregation
>> between the bond and the switch, and constantly updates the link
>> status between the aggregation partners. Mode 4 also has
>> configurable load balance hashing so is better for in-order
>> delivery of TCP streams compared to Mode 5 or Mode 6.
>>
>> https://wiki.linuxfoundation.org/networking/bonding
>>
>> *
>> *balance-tlb or 5*
>> Adaptive transmit load balancing: channel bonding that does not
>> require any special switch support. The outgoing traffic is
>> distributed according to the current load (computed relative to
>> the speed) on each slave. Incoming traffic is received by the
>> current slave. *If the receiving slave fails, another slave takes
>> over the MAC address of the failed receiving slave.*
>> o
>> Prerequisite:
>> 1.
>> Ethtool support in the base drivers for retrieving the
>> speed of each slave.
>> *
>> *balance-alb or 6 *
>> Adaptive load balancing: *includes balance-tlb plus receive load
>> balancing* (rlb) for IPV4 traffic, and does not require any
>> special switch support. The receive load balancing is achieved by
>> ARP negotiation.
>> o
>> The bonding driver intercepts the ARP Replies sent by the
>> local system on their way out and overwrites the source
>> hardware address with the unique hardware address of one of
>> the slaves in the bond such that different peers use
>> different hardware addresses for the server.
>> o
>> Receive traffic from connections created by the server is
>> also balanced. When the local system sends an ARP Request the
>> bonding driver copies and saves the peer's IP information
>> from the ARP packet.
>> o
>> When the ARP Reply arrives from the peer, its hardware
>> address is retrieved and the bonding driver initiates an ARP
>> reply to this peer assigning it to one of the slaves in the bond.
>> o
>> A problematic outcome of using ARP negotiation for balancing
>> is that each time that an ARP request is broadcast it uses
>> the hardware address of the bond. Hence, peers learn the
>> hardware address of the bond and the balancing of receive
>> traffic collapses to the current slave. This is handled by
>> sending updates (ARP Replies) to all the peers with their
>> individually assigned hardware address such that the traffic
>> is redistributed. Receive traffic is also redistributed when
>> a new slave is added to the bond and when an inactive slave
>> is re-activated. The receive load is distributed sequentially
>> (round robin) among the group of highest speed slaves in the
>> bond.
>> o
>> When a link is reconnected or a new slave joins the bond the
>> receive traffic is redistributed among all active slaves in
>> the bond by initiating ARP Replies with the selected mac
>> address to each of the clients. The updelay parameter
>> (detailed below) must be set to a value equal or greater than
>> the switch's forwarding delay so that the ARP Replies sent to
>> the peers will not be blocked by the switch.
>>
>> On 2/25/19 1:16 PM, Martin Toth wrote:
>>> Hi Alex,
>>>
>>> you have to use bond mode 4 (LACP - 802.3ad) in order to achieve
>>> redundancy of cables/ports/switches. I suppose this is what you want.
>>>
>>> BR,
>>> Martin
>>>
>>>> On 25 Feb 2019, at 11:43, Alex K <rightkicktech at gmail.com
>>>> <mailto:rightkicktech at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi All,
>>>>
>>>> I was asking if it is possible to have the two separate cables
>>>> connected to two different physical switched. When trying mode6 or
>>>> mode1 in this setup gluster was refusing to start the volumes,
>>>> giving me "transport endpoint is not connected".
>>>>
>>>> server1: cable1 ---------------- switch1 ---------------------
>>>> server2: cable1
>>>> |
>>>> server1: cable2 ---------------- switch2 ---------------------
>>>> server2: cable2
>>>>
>>>> Both switches are connected with each other also. This is done to
>>>> achieve redundancy for the switches.
>>>> When disconnecting cable2 from both servers, then gluster was happy.
>>>> What could be the problem?
>>>>
>>>> Thanx,
>>>> Alex
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 11:32 AM Jorick Astrego <jorick at netbulae.eu
>>>> <mailto:jorick at netbulae.eu>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> We use bonding mode 6 (balance-alb) for GlusterFS traffic
>>>>
>>>> https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_gluster_storage/3.4/html/administration_guide/network4
>>>>
>>>> Preferred bonding mode for Red Hat Gluster Storage client
>>>> is mode 6 (balance-alb), this allows client to transmit
>>>> writes in parallel on separate NICs much of the time.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Jorick Astrego
>>>>
>>>> On 2/25/19 5:41 AM, Dmitry Melekhov wrote:
>>>>> 23.02.2019 19:54, Alex K пишет:
>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have a replica 3 setup where each server was configured
>>>>>> with a dual interfaces in mode 6 bonding. All cables were
>>>>>> connected to one common network switch.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To add redundancy to the switch, and avoid being a single
>>>>>> point of failure, I connected each second cable of each
>>>>>> server to a second switch. This turned out to not function as
>>>>>> gluster was refusing to start the volume logging "transport
>>>>>> endpoint is disconnected" although all nodes were able to
>>>>>> reach each other (ping) in the storage network. I switched
>>>>>> the mode to mode 1 (active/passive) and initially it worked
>>>>>> but following a reboot of all cluster same issue appeared.
>>>>>> Gluster is not starting the volumes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Isn't active/passive supposed to work like that? Can one have
>>>>>> such redundant network setup or are there any other
>>>>>> recommended approaches?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, we use lacp, I guess this is mode 4 ( we use teamd ), it
>>>>> is, no doubt, best way.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanx,
>>>>>> Alex
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Gluster-users mailing list
>>>>>> Gluster-users at gluster.org <mailto:Gluster-users at gluster.org>
>>>>>> https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Gluster-users mailing list
>>>>> Gluster-users at gluster.org <mailto:Gluster-users at gluster.org>
>>>>> https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Met vriendelijke groet, With kind regards,
>>>>
>>>> Jorick Astrego
>>>> *
>>>> Netbulae Virtualization Experts *
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> Tel: 053 20 30 270 info at netbulae.eu <mailto:info at netbulae.eu>
>>>> Staalsteden 4-3A KvK 08198180
>>>> Fax: 053 20 30 271 www.netbulae.eu <http://www.netbulae.eu/>
>>>> 7547 TA Enschede BTW NL821234584B01
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Gluster-users mailing list
>>>> Gluster-users at gluster.org <mailto:Gluster-users at gluster.org>
>>>> https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Gluster-users mailing list
>>>> Gluster-users at gluster.org <mailto:Gluster-users at gluster.org>
>>>> https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Gluster-users mailing list
>>> Gluster-users at gluster.org
>>> https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Met vriendelijke groet, With kind regards,
>>
>> Jorick Astrego
>> *
>> Netbulae Virtualization Experts *
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Tel: 053 20 30 270 info at netbulae.eu <mailto:info at netbulae.eu>
>> Staalsteden 4-3A KvK 08198180
>> Fax: 053 20 30 271 www.netbulae.eu <http://www.netbulae.eu> 7547 TA
>> Enschede BTW NL821234584B01
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gluster-users mailing list
>> Gluster-users at gluster.org <mailto:Gluster-users at gluster.org>
>> https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
>
Met vriendelijke groet, With kind regards,
Jorick Astrego
Netbulae Virtualization Experts
----------------
Tel: 053 20 30 270 info at netbulae.eu Staalsteden 4-3A KvK 08198180
Fax: 053 20 30 271 www.netbulae.eu 7547 TA Enschede BTW NL821234584B01
----------------
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20190225/3e38fe75/attachment.html>
More information about the Gluster-users
mailing list