|   | 
      | 
  
  
      | 
      | 
  
 
     | 
    | 
  
  
     | 
    | 
  
  
    |   | 
      | 
  
  
    | 
         
xen-users
RE: [Xen-users] RAID10 Array
 
Thanks Rob, 
  
I guess I'll just have to get the money together first :) 
  
So I will try out both the 802.ad method as well as the AoE "Load 
Balanced" method.. 
  
Thanks 
  
Jonathan  
 
  
From: Robert Dunkley 
[mailto:Robert@xxxxxxxxx] Sent: Thu 17/06/2010 14:33 To: 
Jonathan Tripathy Cc: kriegisch@xxxxxxxx Subject: RE: 
[Xen-users] RAID10 Array
  
Hi 
Jonathan, 
  
  
Theoretical 
would be 2Gbit to the Nodes and 4Gbit to the Storage so 2 nodes could for 
example get 2gbit bandwidth each simultaneously but this does come with some 
loss in practice and additional CPU overhead. 
  
The 
ATA load balance type situation described in the previous email allows 1gb to 
any one node from a single device on the storage server but up to 4 nodes could 
drag 1gbit each simultaneously from the storage server. Considering how many 
nodes you are planning the load balanced scenario might even be preferable to 
LACP/802.3AD as long as the ATAoE target software can do a good job due to 
potentially lower CPU overhead and easier implementation of multiple switches 
for redundancy. 
  
None 
of these software decision will affect your hardware choice so its portably 
about time you got your hands dirty J 
  
  
Rob 
  
From: Jonathan 
Tripathy [mailto:jonnyt@xxxxxxxxxxx]  Sent: 17 June 2010 
14:19 To: Robert Dunkley; 
xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: RE: [Xen-users] RAID10 
Array   
  
And if I was to use let's say 4 teamed ports coming out of 
the storage server, and 2 teamed ports going into the xen node, would the 
max I'd get be still 1Gbit?  
 
  
  
From: Robert Dunkley 
[mailto:Robert@xxxxxxxxx] Sent: Thu 17/06/2010 14:15 To: 
Jonathan Tripathy Subject: RE: [Xen-users] RAID10 
Array  
Hi 
Jonathan, 
  
LACP 
and 802.3AD are used together on those HP Soho switches. I might be wrong but 
LACP I think allows automatic negotiation to some degree at the switch side. 
 
  
I 
have used LACP with Broadcom based NICs in Windows and the HP switch you are 
looking at. You only need to enable LACP on the switch ports plugged into your 
disk box and then the software on the server should be able to sort the rest (I 
enabled it with Broadcom NICs under Windows and it worked as 
advertised). 
  
  
Rob 
  
From: 
xen-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
[mailto:xen-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jonathan 
Tripathy Sent: 17 June 2010 14:07 To: Adi Kriegisch; 
xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: RE: [Xen-users] RAID10 
Array   
  
  
  
From: Adi Kriegisch 
[mailto:kriegisch@xxxxxxxx] Sent: Thu 17/06/2010 14:03 To: 
Jonathan Tripathy Cc: xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: 
Re: [Xen-users] RAID10 Array  
Hi!
  > Looking at this page https://help.ubuntu.com/community/HighlyAvailableAoETarget > 
they seem to have made a linux "bond" called bond0 and are telling the 
AoE > target to use that. This confuses me... > Would it be of any 
benifit to create a "mode 4" bond and use 802.3ad with ATA > over 
Ethernet? Or would that be just a waste, when AoE can use the interfaces > 
directly? ggaoed for example can handle multiple interfaces in the 
configuration and is designed to deliver highest performance with for example 
automatically load balancing over several NICs. If you want to use vblade 
you might be better off using bonding because vblade cannot handle several 
interfaces in one instance. You'll get another performance penalty when using 
several instances of vblade listening on different interfaces. I am not 
sure if LACP enhances performance in your case: I think from one server to 
the other you will only get 1GBit; for LACP to work as expected you need 
many-to-many or many-to-one connections. All pakets belonging to a connection 
will use the same wire. This article has some details: http://serverfault.com/questions/8512/multiplexed-1-gbps-ethernet also 
Wikipedia has some information on this.
  Another thing is that you loose 
the ability of having a redundancy in the switching backend.
  -- 
Adi 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
So if I use ggaoed and just put all 4 NICs into 
its config file, that should allow me to get 4Gbit of bandwidth? And no 
configuration is required on the switch? 
BTW, does 802.3ad "mode 4" use LACP? Or I am 
getting mixed up?  
The 
SAQ Group 
Registered 
Office: 18 Chapel Street, Petersfield, Hampshire GU32 3DZ SAQ 
is the trading name of SEMTEC Limited. Registered in England & 
Wales Company Number: 06481952 
  
http://www.saqnet.co.uk AS29219 
SAQ 
Group Delivers high quality, honestly priced communication and I.T. services to 
UK Business. 
Broadband : 
Domains : Email : Hosting : CoLo : Servers : Racks : Transit : Backups : Managed 
Networks : Remote Support. 
  
 ![SAQ Group]()  
  
ISPA Member   
 
The 
SAQ Group 
Registered 
Office: 18 Chapel Street, Petersfield, Hampshire GU32 3DZ SAQ is the 
trading name of SEMTEC Limited. Registered in England & Wales Company 
Number: 06481952 
  
http://www.saqnet.co.uk AS29219 
SAQ 
Group Delivers high quality, honestly priced communication and I.T. services to 
UK Business. 
Broadband : 
Domains : Email : Hosting : CoLo : Servers : Racks : Transit : Backups : Managed 
Networks : Remote Support. 
  
 ![SAQ Group]()  
  
ISPA 
Member  
 |  
 _______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users 
 |   
 
| <Prev in Thread] | 
Current Thread | 
[Next in Thread>
 |  
- Re: [Xen-users] RAID10 Array, (continued)
- Re: [Xen-users] RAID10 Array, Adi Kriegisch
 - RE: [Xen-users] RAID10 Array, Jonathan Tripathy
 - Re: [Xen-users] RAID10 Array, Adi Kriegisch
 - RE: [Xen-users] RAID10 Array, Jonathan Tripathy
 - Re: [Xen-users] RAID10 Array, Adi Kriegisch
 - RE: [Xen-users] RAID10 Array, Jonathan Tripathy
 - RE: [Xen-users] RAID10 Array, James Harper
 
- Re: [Xen-users] RAID10 Array, Adi Kriegisch
 - RE: [Xen-users] RAID10 Array, Jonathan Tripathy
 - Message not available
 - RE: [Xen-users] RAID10 Array, Jonathan Tripathy
 - Message not available
 - RE: [Xen-users] RAID10 Array,
Jonathan Tripathy <=
 
    
- Message not available
 - RE: [Xen-users] RAID10 Array, Jonathan Tripathy
 - Message not available
 - RE: [Xen-users] RAID10 Array, Jonathan Tripathy
 - RE: [Xen-users] RAID10 Array, Jonathan Tripathy
 
- Re: [Xen-users] RAID10 Array, Adi Kriegisch
 
- Re: [Xen-users] RAID10 Array, Bart Coninckx
 
- Message not available
 - RE: [Xen-users] RAID10 Array, Jonathan Tripathy
 - Re: [Xen-users] RAID10 Array, Adi Kriegisch
 
- RE: [Xen-users] RAID10 Array, James Harper
 - Re: [Xen-users] RAID10 Array, Adi Kriegisch
 
 
Re: [Xen-users] RAID10 Array, Bart Coninckx
 |  
  
 | 
    | 
  
  
    |   | 
    |