Il giorno gio 10 mag 2018 alle ore 02:30 Christian Balzer <chibi@xxxxxxx> ha scritto: > This cosmic imbalance would clearly lead to the end of the universe. > Seriously, think it through, what do you _think_ will happen? I thought what David told: "For a write on a replicated pool with size 3 the client writes to the primary osd across the public network and then the primary osd sends the other 2 copies across the cluster network to the secondary OSDs. So for writes the public network uses N bandwidth while the cluster use 2N bandwidth for the replica copies. Seeing as the write isn't acknowledged until all 3 copies are written it makes no sense to have a faster public network" This is exactly what I've imagined > Lastly, more often than not segregated networks are not needed, add > unnecessary complexity and the resources spent on them would be better > used to have just one fast and redundant network instead. Biggest concern here is that I don't have enough 10Gbe ports/switches (due to their cost), thus having 4 10GbE (for a fully redundant environment) is not possible and our current switches are only with 16 10GBe ports. Probably, I can buy 2x 24 10GBe switches and use half ports for public network and the other half for cluster but this will reduce the environment to only 12 usable ports (so, 12 "servers" at max, between hypervisors and storages) Our current storage servers are made with 12 slots (not all used) with SATA disks, they should provide 12*100MB/s = 1.2GBps/s when reading from all disks at once, thus, a 10GB network would be needed, right ? Maybe a dual gigabit port bonded together could do the job. A single gigabit link would be saturated by a single disk. Is my assumption correct ? _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
 |