From: Lars Marowsky-Bree <lmb@suse.de>
To: cluster-devel.redhat.com
Subject: [Cluster-devel] SCTP versus OpenAIS/corosync time-outs
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2009 22:29:41 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20091104212941.GD32760@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4AEE9B47.6060206@redhat.com>
On 2009-11-02T08:41:43, Christine Caulfield <ccaulfie@redhat.com> wrote:
>> No concurrently active transmission ("rrp_mode active") - I wonder if it
>> is possible to put SCTP into such an mode, or, vice-versa, if this means
>> the DLM might be better off directly opening several TCP connections on
>> its own (and using them all at once, simply discarding duplicate
>> messages)?
> If you want to add TCP multi-homing code to the DLM, feel free. But it'll
> be complicated and messy I promise. And it seems pointless to reimplement
> all the sort of failover code that's already in SCTP for free.
Well, the thing is that active/active doesn't seem to be something SCTP
actually _can_ do, while quite obviously being the thing we'd want. I'd
love to be proven wrong about SCTP, of course, that'd make things
easier.
>> I'm not sure what kind of problems exist, if any, but this may be a
>> worth-while thing to consider or at least contemplate. I welcome
>> feedback ;-)
> To be honest, RRP & DLM/SCTP is not well tested or used. There are probably
> lots of things that could be done to improve it. In particular the failover
> aspect of it (the most important part of course) has probably not been
> tried under any sort of serious load ... though i could be wrong.
Yeah, I'm trying to scope what needs to be tested and improved.
(Having OpenAIS+DLM run over bonding is mostly fine, but bonding is
sometimes the problem, and doesn't support all topologies; hence the
need to explore SCTP, or if SCTP can't do that, some alternative.)
A quite different trick for redundant networking would be to assign
static addresses to lo:X and run OSPF over all links, and having DLM
connect to the static IPs. That's quite trivial to setup, give us
"resilient" TCP (w/o needing to mess with SCTP, bonding, or anything).
Comments?
Regards,
Lars
--
Architect Storage/HA, OPS Engineering, Novell, Inc.
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG N?rnberg)
"Experience is the name everyone gives to their mistakes." -- Oscar Wilde
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-11-04 21:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-10-31 0:20 [Cluster-devel] SCTP versus OpenAIS/corosync time-outs Lars Marowsky-Bree
2009-11-02 8:41 ` Christine Caulfield
2009-11-02 16:37 ` David Teigland
2009-11-04 21:29 ` Lars Marowsky-Bree [this message]
2009-11-05 7:23 ` Fabio M. Di Nitto
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20091104212941.GD32760@suse.de \
--to=lmb@suse.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.