Antw: Re: Antw: Re: [Question] About "Add note about rrp active beeing unsupported". of corosync2.3.5

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



>>> Andrei Borzenkov <arvidjaar@xxxxxxxxx> schrieb am 10.08.2015 um 08:38 in
Nachricht
<CAA91j0UA8oW+bCFu60jbB_LPegoy3ar-8j60y69zNP6zUKSTkw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 9:30 AM, Ulrich Windl
> <Ulrich.Windl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>> Steven Dake <steven.dake@xxxxxxxxx> schrieb am 09.08.2015 um 01:02 in 
> Nachricht
>> <CAPwfPsjd_SGrC923OUU=Q4LeUki_4nKExUCrZAT8Y7CiX8Ccng@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>>> Be careful with bonding - there are several different operational modes and
>>> only one works.  We tested bonding extensively at RHT with corosync and
>>> came to the conclusion that only one bonding mode was reliable with
>>> corosync.  I don't recall what the bonding mode # was specifically, perhaps
>>> Honza could read the documentation and report.
>>
>> Hi!
>>
>> I hope there won't be another message saying only one type of NIC was found 
> to be working with Corosync ;-)
> 
> My experience is that if higher level protocol natively supports
> multiple links with proper failure detection and failover, using lower
> level aggregation just makes things worse. I'd rather see proper
> support for multiple links on corosync level.
> 
>> Before making statements like the one above, precisely list the requirements 
> that corosync has, preferably referencing the bugs that lead to those 
> requirements.
>> My basic idea is: If some UDP protocol like NFS works with a specific 
> network connection, why shouldn't corosync work with a connection of equal 
> quality?
> 
> Because different protocols have different requirements? You can lose
> lot of NFS datagrams it will try recover indefinitely if suitably
> configured; but corosync likely have much stricter requirements and
> may not tolerate connectivity loss during switch between links.

The point is that NFS can be fitted to your needs (timeouts, soft vs. hard, etc.) Corosync also has a bucnh of parameters. My idea is that one could fit corosync also to one's needs.

Regards,
Ulrich

[...]




_______________________________________________
discuss mailing list
discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.corosync.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Clusters]     [Corosync Project]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Photo]     [Yosemite News]    [Yosemite Photos]    [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [X.Org]

  Powered by Linux