Re: Gluster and bonding

Jim Kinney <jim.kinney@xxxxxxxxx> · Mon, 25 Feb 2019 07:17:30 -0500

Unless the link between the two switches is set as a dedicated management link, won't that link create a problem? On the dual switch setup I have, there's a dedicated connection that handles inter-switch data. I'm not using bonding or teaming at the servers as I have 40Gb ethernet nics. Gluster is fine across this.

On February 25, 2019 5:43:24 AM EST, Alex K <rightkicktech@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi All, 

I was asking if it is possible to have the two separate cables connected to two different physical switched. When trying mode6 or mode1 in this setup gluster was refusing to start the volumes, giving me "transport endpoint is not connected". 

server1: cable1 ---------------- switch1 --------------------- server2: cable1
                                            |
server1: cable2 ---------------- switch2 --------------------- server2: cable2

Both switches are connected with each other also. This is done to achieve redundancy for the switches. 
When disconnecting cable2 from both servers, then gluster was happy. 
What could be the problem?

Thanx,
Alex

On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 11:32 AM Jorick Astrego <jorick@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

    Hi,
    We use bonding mode 6 (balance-alb) for GlusterFS traffic
    https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_gluster_storage/3.4/html/administration_guide/network4

      Preferred bonding mode for Red Hat Gluster Storage client is
        mode 6 (balance-alb), this allows client to transmit writes in
        parallel on separate NICs much of the time. 

    Regards,
    Jorick Astrego

    On 2/25/19 5:41 AM, Dmitry Melekhov
      wrote:

      23.02.2019 19:54, Alex K пишет:

          Hi all, 

          I have a replica 3 setup where each server was configured
            with a dual interfaces in mode 6 bonding. All cables were
            connected to one common network switch. 

          To add redundancy to the switch, and avoid being a single
            point of failure, I connected each second cable of each
            server to a second switch. This turned out to not function
            as gluster was refusing to start the volume logging
            "transport endpoint is disconnected" although all nodes were
            able to reach each other (ping) in the storage network. I
            switched the mode to mode 1 (active/passive) and initially
            it worked but following a reboot of all cluster same issue
            appeared. Gluster is not starting the volumes. 

          Isn't active/passive supposed to work like that? Can one
            have such redundant network setup or are there any other
            recommended approaches?

      Yes, we use lacp, I guess this is mode 4 ( we use teamd ), it
        is, no doubt, best way.

          Thanx, 

          Alex

        _______________________________________________
Gluster-users mailing list
Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users

      _______________________________________________
Gluster-users mailing list
Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users

Met vriendelijke groet, With kind regards,

Jorick Astrego

Netbulae Virtualization Experts 
Tel:  053 20 30 270     info@xxxxxxxxxxx     Staalsteden 4-3A     KvK 08198180
    Fax: 053 20 30 271     www.netbulae.eu     7547 TA Enschede     BTW NL821234584B01

_______________________________________________

Gluster-users mailing list

Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx

https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. All tyopes are thumb related and reflect authenticity._______________________________________________
Gluster-users mailing list
Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users

Tel: 053 20 30 270	info@xxxxxxxxxxx	Staalsteden 4-3A	KvK 08198180
Fax: 053 20 30 271	www.netbulae.eu	7547 TA Enschede	BTW NL821234584B01