On 15:55 Thu 26 Sep, Roman Penyaev wrote: > > I'll write patch to remove "ms_async_rdma_device_name" and get the > > device name through public_addr/cluster_addr. > > Removal is not a good option since you always have to think about > compatibility. I agree with that compatibility is quite important. However, if the feature isn't widely used in production environment, we could make some change to improve it. > > > BTW, have you seen user use deploy Ceph/RDMA in production environment? > > Do they seperate the public/cluster network or use the same network? > > Never met the separation network for rdma transport. But I can be > wrong here. Do you mean that you've seen that some users use Ceph/RDMA in production environment with using same network for public/cluster message? If the RDMA NIC has 2 ports, how to make full use of the ports in this kind of case? > > -- > Roman > _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
 |