[Gluster-users] Gluster and bonding
rightkicktech at gmail.com
Tue Feb 26 14:14:54 UTC 2019
Thank you to all for your suggestions.
I came here since only gluster was having issues to start. Ping and other
networking services were showing everything fine, so I guess there is sth
at gluster that does not like what I tried to do.
Unfortunately I have this system in production and I cannot experiment. It
was a customer request to add redundancy to the switch and I went with what
I assumed would work.
I guess I have to have the switches stacked, but the current ones do not
support this. They are just simple managed switches.
Multiple IPs per peers could be a solution.
I will search a little more and in case I have sth I will get back.
On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 6:52 AM Strahil <hunter86_bg at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hi Alex,
> As per the following ( ttps://
> ) your switches need to be stacked in order to support lacp with your setup.
> Yet, I'm not sure if balance-alb will work with 2 separate switches -
> maybe some special configuration is needed ?!?
> As far as I know gluster can have multiple IPs matched to a single peer,
> but I'm not sure if having 2 separate networks will be used as
> active-backup or active-active.
> Someone more experienced should jump in.
> Best Regards,
> Strahil Nikolov
> On Feb 25, 2019 12:43, Alex K <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:
> server1: cable2 ---------------- switch2 --------------------- server2:
> 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?
> On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 11:32 AM Jorick Astrego <jorick at netbulae.eu>
> We use bonding mode 6 (balance-alb) for GlusterFS traffic
> 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.
> 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.
> Gluster-users mailing listGluster-users at gluster.org <https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users>https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Gluster-users