| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <1271393633.16881.3606.camel@edumazet-laptop> Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 06:53:53 +0200 From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> To: "George B." <georgeb@...il.com> Cc: netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: Network multiqueue question Le jeudi 15 avril 2010 à 21:00 -0700, George B. a écrit : > On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 10:47 AM, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote: > > > > > Since this bothers me a bit, I will probably work on this in a near > > future. (adding real multiqueue capability and RCU to bonding fast > > paths) > > > > Ref: http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.network/152987 > > That would be great and you would have my sincere thanks.. And if > anyone is interested, what we do is take a pair of "top of rack" > switches and cluster them together so they appear as one switch. > Configure a LAG consisting of a port on each physical switch to a pair > of bonded interfaces on the server and use mode 2 bonding. In normal > operation, both interfaces are active. Should one switch experience a > power or interface failure, the server sees one of the interfaces fail > but just keeps working on the remaining interface. There is no > "failover" event going on. > What kind of traffic do your machines manage exactly ? On server, you use two ports of the same kind (same number of queues) ? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists