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 <jak3kaj@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 1:07 PM Ronny Aasen <ronny+ceph-users@xxxxxxxx> 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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
_______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
