Can't it just be the max disk perf is reached during the second test, adding extra paths won't be of any help or maybe could worsen the expected perfs .... 2010/7/6 Christophe Varoqui <christophe.varoqui@xxxxxxxxx>: >> routing points to the correct interface per network. Maybe my test >> (bonnie++) >> >> is not an appropriate one to show the difference in speed? >> > an interesting data point would be a perf run when iet target has only one > target port on a bonded interface a multipath on client side. > > And maybe the other combinations. Th eset combinations would be : > - client bonded, target not bonded > - client bonded, target bonded (i understand this is the scenario with good > performance you reported earlier) > - client not bonded, target not bonded (perf expected from a single path in > your testing) > - client not bonded, target bonded > > the mixed setup would not be adequate for production as they require linked > or single switch setups, but the information might help determine if the > performance drop is due to multipath or iet multi-target. > > Bye. > > -- > dm-devel mailing list > dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel > -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
