In which case, an appropriate test would be to have several servers push
data to one the server while it's interface is un-bonded. We'd anticipate
that the results would be under 1000Mbps. Then do the same with the bonded
interface and the results would hopefully be more consistently around
1000Mpbs. So I should not expect fastest throughput, simply a fatter pipe?
If it matters these are the hashing options available on the switch:
Thanks,
Dermot
Src MAC, VLAN, EType, incoming port
Dest MAC, VLAN, EType, incoming port
Src/Dest MAC, VLAN, EType, incoming port
Src IP and Src TCP/UDP Port fields
Dest IP and Dest TCP/UDP Port fields
Src/Dest IP and TCP/UDP Port fields
Enhanced hashing mode
On 25 March 2013 14:56, James Hogarth james.hoga...@gmail.com wrote:
Does anyone have any thoughts? I pasted some details below increase they
have a bearing.
Remember that LACP (802.3ad) uses a hash algorithm (configurable on how
it's carried out and whether you use mac addresses, dst/src IPs and ports
will vary quite often for optimisation) to pick a physical connection for
the TCP flow ... and that will stay over the physical connection.
As such for any one given flow you'll see up to the speed of the physical
interface the data is going over... the speed increases come with multiple
systems communicating with that server and with the right pick of hashing
function having those connections go over differing interfaces.
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
