On 2014-01-22T15:02:11, Francois Gaudreault <fgaudreault@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Well LACP is at the hypervisor level, so for Corosync, it's a standard
> interface.
>
> Active/Passive is not really an option for us, we need the 2GB bandwidth.
> Any timeouts you think we can tweak?
Hi all,
while I agree with digimer's assessment, the last paragraph above is a
bit tricky. Because if you *need* the 2GBit/s bandwidth (in order to
satisfy the business demand), you cannot really sustain your services
during degraded mode - which is the whole point of bonding, right? ;-)
Best,
Lars
--
Architect Storage/HA
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
"Experience is the name everyone gives to their mistakes." -- Oscar Wilde
_______________________________________________
discuss mailing list
discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.corosync.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
