Date: Mon, 06 Feb 2012 13:51:58 +0200 From: Daniel Kalchev <daniel@digsys.bg> To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: HAST considarations Message-ID: <4F2FBEDE.5020403@digsys.bg> In-Reply-To: <4F2FBCD2.6000603@my.gd> References: <CA%2BdUSypg_3uNYMtU2tnvrvAPFw8MjM596tDZ=R_eqpE=GL1-=A@mail.gmail.com> <FAE6B79D-6791-4B1F-8E0D-79BEB2765B3B@digsys.bg> <4F2FBCD2.6000603@my.gd>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 06.02.12 13:43, Damien Fleuriot wrote: > This issue is due to a bug in OpenBSD 3.8's implementation of CARP. > > It triggers if you have net.inet.carp.preempt=1 on the node. > > If the sysctl is set, the interface assumes MASTERship immediately upon > being brought up, then yields in the presence of a better master. I know about this patch, but on my systems net.inet.carp.preempt=0 I was running 8-stable, now 9-stable on these servers and observe the same behavior. George Kontostanos: My setup has 1G interfaces for the CARP/Internet and 10G interfaces for the backend/HAST. I am doing hast over the 10G interfaces. For a system with part of 10k SAS drives, and ZFS mirror (each element of the mirror is an HAST provider), running bonnie++ I see about 100MB/sec flow to the secondary HAST and that about saturates the disks as well (50-60MB/sec.. should have been better) I had earlier experiment with 4 drives in each system and that replicated at up to 230 MB/sec. Daniel
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4F2FBEDE.5020403>