Paul Emmerich writes: > Split networks is rarely worth it. One fast network is usually better. > And since you mentioned having only two interfaces: one bond is way > better than two independent interfaces. > IPv4/6 dual stack setups will be supported in Nautilus, you currently > have to use either IPv4 or IPv6. > Jumbo frames: often mentioned but usually not worth it. > (Yes, I know that this is somewhat controversial and increasing MTU is > often a standard trick for performance tuning, but I still have to see > have a benchmark that actually shows a significant performance > improvements. Some quick tests show that I can save around 5-10% CPU > load on a system doing ~50 gbit/s of IO traffic which is almost > nothing given the total system load) Agree with everything Paul said. (I know this is lame, but I think all of this bears repeating :-) To address another question in Jan's original post: I would not consider using link-local IPv6 addressing. Not just because I doubt that this would work (Ceph would always need to know/tell the OS which interface it should use with such an address), but mainly because even if it does work, it will only work as long as everything is on a single logical IPv6 network. This will artificially limit your options for the evolution of your cluster. Routable addresses are cheap in IPv6, use them! -- Simon. _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
 |