If you have network congestion, then a separate admin network is of benefit. 
Maybe less important if you have 10GbE networks, but if (for example), you 
normally rely on IB to talk data, and gpfs fails back to the Ethernet (which 
may be only 1GbE), then you may have cluster issues, for example missing gpfs 
pings.

Having a separate physical admin network can protect you from this.

Having been bitten by this several years back, it's a good idea IMHO to have a 
separate admin network.

Simon
________________________________________
From: [email protected] 
[[email protected]] on behalf of J. Eric Wonderley 
[[email protected]]
Sent: 10 April 2017 17:58
To: gpfsug main discussion list
Subject: Re: [gpfsug-discuss] GPFS Network Configuration - 1 Daemon Network , 1 
Admin Network

1)  You want more that one quorum node on your server cluster.  The non-quorum 
node does need a daemon network interface exposed to the client cluster as does 
the quorum nodes.

2)  No.  Admin network is for intra cluster communications...not inter 
cluster(between clusters).  Daemon interface(port 1191) is used for 
communications between clusters.  I think there is little benefit gained by 
having designated an admin network...maybe someone can point out benefits of an 
admin network.



Eric Wonderley

On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 12:47 PM, Hans-Joachim Ehlers 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

My understanding of the GPFS networks is not quite clear.

For an GPFS setup i would like to use 2 Networks

1 Daemon (data)  network using port 1191 using for example. 
10.1.1.0/24<http://10.1.1.0/24>

2 Admin Network using for example: 192.168.1.0/24<http://192.168.1.0/24> network

Questions

1) Thus in a 2+1 Cluster ( 2 GPFS Server + 1 Quorum Server ) Config -  Does the 
Tiebreaker Node needs to have access to the daemon(data) 10.1.1. network or is 
it sufficient for the tiebreaker node to be configured as part of the admin 
192.168.1 network ?

2) Does a remote cluster needs access to the GPFS Admin 192.168.1 network or is 
it sufficient for the remote cluster to access the 10.1.1 network ? If so i 
assume that remotecluster commands and ping to/from remote cluster are going 
via the Daemon network ?

Note:

I am aware and read 
https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/community/wikis/home?lang=en#!/wiki/General%20Parallel%20File%20System%20(GPFS)/page/GPFS%20Network%20Communication%20Overview

--
Unix Systems Engineer
--------------------------------------------------
MetaModul GmbH
Süderstr. 12
25336 Elmshorn
HRB: 11873 PI
UstID: DE213701983
Mobil: + 49 177 4393994<tel:+49%20177%204393994>
Mail: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>

_______________________________________________
gpfsug-discuss mailing list
gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org<http://spectrumscale.org>
http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss


_______________________________________________
gpfsug-discuss mailing list
gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org
http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss

Reply via email to