Channel-bonding progress
Many of your questions may have already been answered in earlier discussions or in the FAQ. The search results page will indicate current discussions as well as past list serves, articles, and papers.
Mike Weller weller at zyvex.comTue Aug 7 16:46:38 PDT 2001
- Previous message: Channel-bonding 2.2 vs 2.4?
- Next message: going nutty with permission errors etc.!
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Hi, I think I managed to solve the problem. I noticed that in my "ifconfig" output, there's a lot of "overruns" packets reported. Also, someone mentioned the possibility of it not arp'ing through bond0. I did 2 things. I'm not sure what works yet, but here are my preliminary results. I can achieve 180-200Mbps in bonding mode if I change the MTU packet size from 1500 to 1200. I also removed the eth1 and eth0 entries in the routing table to ensure that it uses bond0. I'm going to install a better bandwidth benchmark and possibly search for the optimal MTU size and post the results. Here's the script that I used to get the 180-200Mbps with FTP: #!/bin/csh -f insmod bonding ifconfig bond0 down ifconfig eth0 down ifconfig eth1 down ifconfig bond0 inet 10.0.0.2 netmask 255.255.255.0 ifconfig bond0 up ifconfig eth0 up ifconfig eth1 up ifenslave bond0 eth0 ifenslave bond0 eth1 route del -net 10.0.0.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 eth0 route del -net 10.0.0.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 eth1 ifconfig eth0 mtu 1200 ifconfig eth1 mtu 1200 ifconfig bond0 mtu 1200 -- Michael J. Weller, M.Sc. office: (972) 235-7881 x.242 weller at zyvex.com cell: (214) 616-6340 Zyvex Corp., 1321 N Plano facsimile: (972) 235-7882 Richardson, TX 75081 icq: 6180540
- Previous message: Channel-bonding 2.2 vs 2.4?
- Next message: going nutty with permission errors etc.!
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
