I'm looking at tuning up a new site and the bonding issue came up A google search reveals that the gluster docs (and Lindsay) recommend balance-alb bonding. However, "team"ing came up which I wasn't familiar with. Its already in RH6/7 and Ubuntu and their Github page implies its stable. The libteam.org people seem to feel their solution is more lightweight and it seems easy enough to setup. Before I go down this path, I was curious if anyone had any experience/comments with 'team' It would be nice to get a little speed bump essentially for free. -bill
Hi, In general and not in Gluster. we used Teaming for some time and we switched back to Bonding because we had issues with the load balancing of Teaming. With teaming config was "LACP, eth,ipv4,ipv6" the results was one interface utilized more then the other one, and in some cases one interface gets fully utilized, while with Bonding, config we are using is "xmit_hash_policy=layer2+3" or "xmit_hash_policy=layer3+4", load distributed evenly on all interfaces. Of course it depends on the application and the server setup but, since then we only are using Bonding whenever we need load balancing and we had no issues so far. -- Respectfully Mahdi A. Mahdi ________________________________ From: gluster-users-bounces at gluster.org <gluster-users-bounces at gluster.org> on behalf of wk <wkmail at bneit.com> Sent: Saturday, June 17, 2017 10:59:58 PM To: gluster-users at gluster.org Subject: [Gluster-users] Teaming vs Bond? I'm looking at tuning up a new site and the bonding issue came up A google search reveals that the gluster docs (and Lindsay) recommend balance-alb bonding. However, "team"ing came up which I wasn't familiar with. Its already in RH6/7 and Ubuntu and their Github page implies its stable. The libteam.org people seem to feel their solution is more lightweight and it seems easy enough to setup. Before I go down this path, I was curious if anyone had any experience/comments with 'team' It would be nice to get a little speed bump essentially for free. -bill _______________________________________________ Gluster-users mailing list Gluster-users at gluster.org http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20170618/385b3cce/attachment.html>
I haven't done any testing of performance differences, but on my oVirt/rhev i use standard bonding as that's that it supports. On the stand along gluster nodes I use teaming for bonding. Teaming may be slightly easier to manage, but not by much if you are already used to bond setups. I haven't noticed any bugs or issues using teaming. *David Gossage* *Carousel Checks Inc. | System Administrator* *Office* 708.613.2284 On Sat, Jun 17, 2017 at 2:59 PM, wk <wkmail at bneit.com> wrote:> I'm looking at tuning up a new site and the bonding issue came up > > A google search reveals that the gluster docs (and Lindsay) recommend > balance-alb bonding. > > However, "team"ing came up which I wasn't familiar with. Its already in > RH6/7 and Ubuntu and their Github page implies its stable. > > The libteam.org people seem to feel their solution is more lightweight > and it seems easy enough to setup. > > Before I go down this path, I was curious if anyone had any > experience/comments with 'team' > > It would be nice to get a little speed bump essentially for free. > > -bill > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Gluster-users mailing list > Gluster-users at gluster.org > http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20170619/d059795e/attachment.html>
OK, at least its not an *issue* with Gluster. I didn't expect any but you never know. I have been amused at the 'lack' of discussion on Teaming performance found on Google searches. There are lots of 'here it is and here is how to set it up' articles/posts, but no 'ooh-wee-wow it is awesome' comments. It seems that for most people Bonding has worked it kinks out and thus serves its purpose perfectly fine, so no reason to change to Teaming. That or they had Mahdi's experience with Teaming in its present state and bonding just works better for now. For now, I'll just use tried and true ALB bonding on this project. After I have some free time I may play with it some more on a test bed we have here. Among the 'advantages' claimed for Teaming is the lower performance overhead (though "low vs very-low" may not be significant) https://github.com/jpirko/libteam/wiki/Bonding-vs.-Team-features Thanks all for the feedback. I'll let everyone know if my testing happens and if it is a significant difference (good or bad). -bill On 6/19/2017 6:27 AM, David Gossage wrote:> I haven't done any testing of performance differences, but on my > oVirt/rhev i use standard bonding as that's that it supports. On the > stand along gluster nodes I use teaming for bonding. > > Teaming may be slightly easier to manage, but not by much if you are > already used to bond setups. I haven't noticed any bugs or issues > using teaming. > > */David Gossage/*/* > */ > //*Carousel Checks Inc.| System Administrator* > *Office*708.613.2284 > > On Sat, Jun 17, 2017 at 2:59 PM, wk <wkmail at bneit.com > <mailto:wkmail at bneit.com>> wrote: > > I'm looking at tuning up a new site and the bonding issue came up > > A google search reveals that the gluster docs (and Lindsay) > recommend balance-alb bonding. > > However, "team"ing came up which I wasn't familiar with. Its > already in RH6/7 and Ubuntu and their Github page implies its stable. > > The libteam.org <http://libteam.org> people seem to feel their > solution is more lightweight and it seems easy enough to setup. > > Before I go down this path, I was curious if anyone had any > experience/comments with 'team' > > It would be nice to get a little speed bump essentially for free. > > -bill > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Gluster-users mailing list > Gluster-users at gluster.org <mailto:Gluster-users at gluster.org> > http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users > <http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users> > >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20170619/d77c9b15/attachment.html>