cluster-devel.redhat.com archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Lars Marowsky-Bree <lmb@suse.de>
To: cluster-devel.redhat.com
Subject: [Cluster-devel] SCTP versus OpenAIS/corosync time-outs
Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2009 01:20:25 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20091031002025.GS14882@suse.de> (raw)

Hi all, David,

I'm contemplating SCTP versus OpenAIS/corosync. Is dlm_controld(.pcmk)
pro-actively informed if a single ring/link goes down, as to trigger
faster SCTP recovery - or is it left for SCTP to time out on its own and
proceed?

If the latter - is there a way to auto-tune the SCTP time-outs to make
sure the DLM doesn't stall longer than that? I'm wondering whether
there's any chance for higher-level time-outs, ie a monitor operation on
a filesystem-using service.

RFC 5061 seems to support dynamic reconfiguration in such a fashion. If
I'm reading http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4960#page-87 correctly, SCTP
multi-homing is "active/passive", so there's some latency on the
fail-over at least. If several links go down at once, SCTP might try
them in sequence and pick the one surviving link last, incurring a large
latency.

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)?


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 ;-)


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



             reply	other threads:[~2009-10-31  0:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-10-31  0:20 Lars Marowsky-Bree [this message]
2009-11-02  8:41 ` [Cluster-devel] SCTP versus OpenAIS/corosync time-outs Christine Caulfield
2009-11-02 16:37   ` David Teigland
2009-11-04 21:29   ` Lars Marowsky-Bree
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=20091031002025.GS14882@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).