[Lustre-discuss] multihomed OST's configuration

[Mario David]

Hi Klaus

thanks for the answer
we are doing just what you describe

cheers

Mario

Klaus Steden wrote:
> Hi Mario,
>
> Lustre will, if not instructed otherwise, bind to all available NICs on the
> system. I've used Lustre extensively with LACP aggregate groups, and it
> performs quite well.
>
> Configuring multiple NICs from the same host into the same VLAN is something
> of a non-sensical configuration unless you're running some kind of bizarre
> failover scenario, but if they're all going to the same switch, that's an
> impossibility. This kind of configuration would also make ordinary TCP/IP
> routing somewhat funky.
>
> Use NIC bonding, and configure your switch as appropriate to do likewise.
> Cisco, Foundry, Extreme, Juniper, Alcatel, Netgear and a number of others
> all support LACP in their L3 edge switches, and it's a standard feature of
> any core switch.
>
> Once you've set up the switch and the OS, instruct Lustre to use the bond by
> putting "options lnet networks=tcp(bond0)" in your /etc/modprobe.conf and it
> will take care of the rest.
>
> cheers,
> Klaus
>
> On 7/9/08 5:07 AM, "mdavid" <david at lip.pt>did etch on stone tablets:
>
>   
>> hi Brian
>> I was "mislead" by what it says in the ops manual, 12.1 chapter
>>
>> Lustre can use multiple NICs without bonding. There is a difference in
>> performance when Lustre uses multiple NICs versus when it uses bonding
>> NICs.
>>
>> though here it says "multiple NICS" not multihomed configurations.
>>
>> Anyway I still don't know how to configure "multiple NICS" both from
>> the point of view of the OS and Lustre
>> note all the ethXX are in the same LAN, and connected to the same card
>> in the switch
>> if on the Lustre OST's I put
>> options lnet networks=tcp(eth0,eth1,eth2,eth3)
>>
>> how is it configured each ethX
>> in principle I would have a single IP for the server
>>
>> cheers
>>
>> Mario David
>>
>> On Jul 8, 1:25 pm, "Brian J. Murrell" <Brian.Murr... at Sun.COM> wrote:
>>     
>>> On Mon, 2008-07-07 at 03:13 -0700, mdavid wrote:
>>>       
>>>> hi list
>>>> I am a new to lustre (1 week old) and this list.
>>>> I have some Dell PE1950 servers with MD1000 enclosures (scientific
>>>> linux 5 == RHEL5 x86_54) on them and lustre 1.6.5, with lustre patched
>>>> kernels on them
>>>>         
>>>> on a first try (indeed it was the second), I managed to have a lustre
>>>> up and running OK, now
>>>>         
>>>> each dell server has 4 times 1Gb interfaces, and I want to take profit
>>>> from them all
>>>> either I try bonding them, or go for multihomed (which is my first
>>>> try)
>>>>         
>>> If what you want is to get the bandwidth of all 4 interfaces to the
>>> Lustre servers then you really do want bonding.
>>>
>>> Can you explain why you think you want multihoming vs. bonding?  Maybe
>>> I'm misunderstanding your goal.
>>>
>>> b.
>>>
>>>  signature.asc
>>> 1KDownload
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Lustre-discuss mailing list
>>> Lustre-disc... at lists.lustre.orghttp://lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustr
>>> e-discuss
>>>       
>> _______________________________________________
>> Lustre-discuss mailing list
>> Lustre-discuss at lists.lustre.org
>> http://lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss
>>     
>
>