Problems with bonding

  • Hello,


    It's my 1st message on this forum. I hope I will find an answer to my question.
    I have 2 NAS, and on one of them, I want to use bonding because I have two NICs.
    I've got a switch which is compatible with Link Aggregation, and I've got a Dual Port NIC in my PC.


    The hardware :


    NAS :
    Motherboard Tyan S5372-G2NR LC/LH
    8 GB DDR2 ECC FBDIMM
    Xeon E5310
    Adaptec 31605
    The system disk is an 80 GB SATA II Hitachi, plugged on the motherboard
    For the storage : 4 WD RED 1 TB, RAID 10


    The switch : Netgear GS108T v2


    The PC :
    The hardware is not important. I've got Windows 7 Ultimate Edition, and the NIC is an Intel (OEM IBM) PRO/1000PT.


    I've made an aggregation on the PC between the 2 ports of the NIC, and it's configured as 802.3ad.
    On the switch, I made two LAGs : The 1st between the 2 ports which are plugged to the PC, and the second for the 2 cables from the NAS.
    On the NAS, it was difficult. Everything I've tried gives no solution. I think I managed to do something OK, but I'm not sure.
    I've added a little NIC on which I could access the GUI. And in the network interface, I erased the two integrated NICs to be able to select them for the aggregation. I chose 802.3ad, The adress is static. I applied the modifications, I shot down the NAS, I've unplugged the little NIC, rebooted the NAS, and I can connect to it thanks to the static IP adresse of the bond.


    But something is wrong... When I boot, OMV writes on the screen that there is no interface available. When I look at the LEDs on the NICS, only eth0 is blinking (the other is not blinking, as if it was not used).


    When I transfer a file of 2 Go for example, I start at 190 MB/s, but its quickly downs to 130, 125, and it never goes above 125...


    What am I doing wrong ?


    I can answer other questions concerning my configuration if it's necessary.


    Thanks in advance for your informations ! :)


    W.

    NAS 1 : P182 | Asus M2NPV-VM | A64 X2 3200+ | 2 GB DDR2 | Hitachi 60 GB System Drive | Controller Card Dell 2610SA | 2x WD Blue 1 TB - RAID 1 | OMV 1.0.20 (Kralizec)
    NAS 2 : P182 | Tyan S5372-G2NR LC/LH | Xeon E5310 1.6 GHz | 8 GB DDR2 ECC FB-DIMM | Hitachi 80 GB System Drive | Controller Card Adaptec 31605 | 4x WD Red 1 TB - RAID 10 | OMV 2.2.5 (Stone Burner)
    ---------------------------
    I've got a boatload of Thinkpads. Those I use : Thinkpad 600E (PII366 - my alarm clock) | Thinkpad X31 (Squid Proxy under Debian) | Thinkpad T400 (the bedroom one) | Thinkpad X301 (the kitchen one) | T420s (my new one) | Thinkpad T42 (under XP because I need it) | Thinkpad T23 (I looove it !) | T60 (to test OSes) | Another X31 with Smoothwall ready to replace my router...
    ---------------------------
    My Blog : Le Blog de Wilou

    Einmal editiert, zuletzt von wilou62 ()

  • When you use bonding, the "there is no interface available" message is a bug.
    That's normal.
    You can use TLB or other mode to see if the performance is better.
    It's also depend on the Samba version you're using too.
    There are some Samba tweak guides in this forums that may help your issue.

    OMV v5.0
    Asus Z97-A/3.1; i3-4370
    32GB RAM Corsair Vengeance Pro

  • Zitat

    A quick and dirty explanation is that a single line of communication using LACP will not split packets over multiple interfaces.



    For example, if you have a single TCP connection streaming packets from HostA to HostB it will not span interfaces to send those packets. I've been looking at LACP a lot here lately for a solution we are working on and this is a common misconception that 'bonding' or 'trunking' multiple network interfaces with LACP gives you a "throughput" of the combined interface.

    http://serverfault.com/questio…-throughput/569125#569125


    If you use 2 Clients and copy a File from your NAS both should be hitting ~100MB/s

    NAS: Fractal Design Define R4 | Intel Xeon E3-1265L-v3 | Kernel: 4.18 | ASRock Rack E3C224-4L | 32GB ECC RAM | System: Crucial M500(250GB) | LSI 9260-8i - RAID0: 2x Samsung 850 EVO (250GB) + 2x Intel SSD (230G) | LSI 9270-8i - 6x WD Red 6 TB RAID5

  • If you use 2 Clients and copy a File from your NAS both should be hitting ~100MB/s

    That is not correct.
    You have a 50/50 percentage chance that the traffic travels way A or B.
    This is determined by the scheduler implemented on the nic / switchport.
    LACP is good for redundancy (very good convergation times) and for setups where many clients/servers are involved.

  • Hello,


    Thank you for you quick answers.


    The fact that no interface available is shown when booting is due to a bug is a nice thing. I feared something bad.
    I've tried other modes but, if I do that, there's no perceptible difference, and I'm not sure of the configuration of my switch in those cases. With 802.3ad, when I create my aggregation on the switch, I enable LACP, and STP (Spanning Tree). I've tried with Static instead of LACP, and naturally, it's not working. STP enabled or not changes nothing. It seems that without changing nothing on the switch, if I select Round-Robin on the NAS (Mode 0), the two ports of the NIC blink, but the speed is always the same...


    Bonkers : I'm not sure to understand what is said in your quote (English isn't my native language, and sometimes, it's somewhat difficult).


    Thanks anyways ! :)


    Do not hesitate if you need other informations.


    W.

    NAS 1 : P182 | Asus M2NPV-VM | A64 X2 3200+ | 2 GB DDR2 | Hitachi 60 GB System Drive | Controller Card Dell 2610SA | 2x WD Blue 1 TB - RAID 1 | OMV 1.0.20 (Kralizec)
    NAS 2 : P182 | Tyan S5372-G2NR LC/LH | Xeon E5310 1.6 GHz | 8 GB DDR2 ECC FB-DIMM | Hitachi 80 GB System Drive | Controller Card Adaptec 31605 | 4x WD Red 1 TB - RAID 10 | OMV 2.2.5 (Stone Burner)
    ---------------------------
    I've got a boatload of Thinkpads. Those I use : Thinkpad 600E (PII366 - my alarm clock) | Thinkpad X31 (Squid Proxy under Debian) | Thinkpad T400 (the bedroom one) | Thinkpad X301 (the kitchen one) | T420s (my new one) | Thinkpad T42 (under XP because I need it) | Thinkpad T23 (I looove it !) | T60 (to test OSes) | Another X31 with Smoothwall ready to replace my router...
    ---------------------------
    My Blog : Le Blog de Wilou

  • STP (Spanning Tree)

    STP is a Layer2 redundancy protocoll to avoid bridging-loops.
    You can use it instead of LACP. But the redundant ports will be blocked to avoid...


    I've tried with Static instead of LACP, and naturally, it's not working.

    Both sides must be configured the same way: static or LACP cause the LACP configured port only comes up correctly, when the other side also "talks" LACP.


    BTW:
    I do not know any implementation of the scheduler, that works like you expect.
    Usually the scheduler uses static information (often configurable):
    mac/ip-adresses, ports
    These do not change during the conversation, so all traffic flows throug the same line.

  • Hello,


    You write : "If you use 2 Clients and copy a File from your NAS both should be hitting ~100MB/s"


    -> It's not something I do usually, and if I want to use Dual Gigabit, it's to have the opportunity to transfer my files from my PC to my NAS at ~ 200 MB/s more or less. :)


    Enra :


    "Both sides must be configured the same way: static or LACP cause the LACP configured port only comes up correctly, when the other side also "talks" LACP."


    Yes ! :) That was normal according to me, that's the reason why I use 802.3ad on the NAS, why on the PC side, I chose 802.3ad, and that's why I enabled LACP on the switch. A guy at work says that the configuration isn't necessary on the switch if the NAS and the PC are in 802.3ad. I might have loops (and if the switch doesn't have the spanning tree options, it could be a problem). But I've tried with no configuration on the switch, and as I said, different configurations including LACP/no STP, STP/static, a link only on the PC side, on both sides, on the NAS side, and other variants. When it works, the results are the same.


    Perhaps it's important, but I don't think it has an incidence on the problem : I have a proxy in my installation. But I configured it no to interfere with my local network. I say that, because the NIC on the proxy is a 100 MBits/s one. Do you think it can be interesting to try without it ?


    W.

    NAS 1 : P182 | Asus M2NPV-VM | A64 X2 3200+ | 2 GB DDR2 | Hitachi 60 GB System Drive | Controller Card Dell 2610SA | 2x WD Blue 1 TB - RAID 1 | OMV 1.0.20 (Kralizec)
    NAS 2 : P182 | Tyan S5372-G2NR LC/LH | Xeon E5310 1.6 GHz | 8 GB DDR2 ECC FB-DIMM | Hitachi 80 GB System Drive | Controller Card Adaptec 31605 | 4x WD Red 1 TB - RAID 10 | OMV 2.2.5 (Stone Burner)
    ---------------------------
    I've got a boatload of Thinkpads. Those I use : Thinkpad 600E (PII366 - my alarm clock) | Thinkpad X31 (Squid Proxy under Debian) | Thinkpad T400 (the bedroom one) | Thinkpad X301 (the kitchen one) | T420s (my new one) | Thinkpad T42 (under XP because I need it) | Thinkpad T23 (I looove it !) | T60 (to test OSes) | Another X31 with Smoothwall ready to replace my router...
    ---------------------------
    My Blog : Le Blog de Wilou

  • Hello,


    I'm back at home. :)
    I've taken screenshots of my tweaks (OMV, switch and NIC under Windows 7).
    On some tutorials, I see that some of the NICs used by the bond still appear in the list, but I wasn't able to select them if I don't delete them before including them in the aggregation. Perhaps there are some differences between the versions of OMV ? What I've described earlier, to explain how I did my link aggrregation, is that correct ? I've seen too some guides where it's possibile to apply a primary priority and a secondary priority to the ports of the NIC on OMV, but the Intel help in the Windows Device Manager says there's no system of priority with 802.3ad (I've tried to edit /etc/network/interfaces/ to add manually the priority, but it seems that when I reboot, the option is deactivated).
    I've looked for the samba tuning. I've applied some modifications, but the results are the same.
    There's probably something wrong with my configuration, but I don't see what.


    W.


    EDIT :

    • I've configured a static IP for the link on my PC, but with no success (I mean, I'm still at 125 MB/s ~) ;
    • I've tried to make a transfer after deactivating the proxy, no luck ;
    • It seems that it's a little quicker with STP disabled on the switch (but LACP is always enabled).
    • I've rebooted the NAS to look for an option in the board BIOS, but nothing here (juste enable / disable the ports, and the same for the Option ROM... The 2 cards are active.

    Bilder

    NAS 1 : P182 | Asus M2NPV-VM | A64 X2 3200+ | 2 GB DDR2 | Hitachi 60 GB System Drive | Controller Card Dell 2610SA | 2x WD Blue 1 TB - RAID 1 | OMV 1.0.20 (Kralizec)
    NAS 2 : P182 | Tyan S5372-G2NR LC/LH | Xeon E5310 1.6 GHz | 8 GB DDR2 ECC FB-DIMM | Hitachi 80 GB System Drive | Controller Card Adaptec 31605 | 4x WD Red 1 TB - RAID 10 | OMV 2.2.5 (Stone Burner)
    ---------------------------
    I've got a boatload of Thinkpads. Those I use : Thinkpad 600E (PII366 - my alarm clock) | Thinkpad X31 (Squid Proxy under Debian) | Thinkpad T400 (the bedroom one) | Thinkpad X301 (the kitchen one) | T420s (my new one) | Thinkpad T42 (under XP because I need it) | Thinkpad T23 (I looove it !) | T60 (to test OSes) | Another X31 with Smoothwall ready to replace my router...
    ---------------------------
    My Blog : Le Blog de Wilou

    Einmal editiert, zuletzt von wilou62 ()

  • Hello,


    I just read a nice article :
    https://delightlylinux.wordpre…int-17-and-xubuntu-14-04/


    It seems that the fact that I'am using Windows 7 is not the best option if I want to have more speed in my network. I have drivers which can manage Link aggregation, I think the configuration is good. The properties of the link show me that the link is working at 2 GB/s but the OS would'n't allow me to have more that 125 MB/s if I have well understood the article. So I can consider me happy as I have ~120 MB/s...
    Another article indicates that I will see the difference between link aggregation and no link aggregation when I will transfer multiple files at the same time. But that's usually not what I do.


    That's no good news, but it reassures me on my configuration. I probably did no mistakes...


    I'm all ears if you have further informations.


    :)


    W.

    NAS 1 : P182 | Asus M2NPV-VM | A64 X2 3200+ | 2 GB DDR2 | Hitachi 60 GB System Drive | Controller Card Dell 2610SA | 2x WD Blue 1 TB - RAID 1 | OMV 1.0.20 (Kralizec)
    NAS 2 : P182 | Tyan S5372-G2NR LC/LH | Xeon E5310 1.6 GHz | 8 GB DDR2 ECC FB-DIMM | Hitachi 80 GB System Drive | Controller Card Adaptec 31605 | 4x WD Red 1 TB - RAID 10 | OMV 2.2.5 (Stone Burner)
    ---------------------------
    I've got a boatload of Thinkpads. Those I use : Thinkpad 600E (PII366 - my alarm clock) | Thinkpad X31 (Squid Proxy under Debian) | Thinkpad T400 (the bedroom one) | Thinkpad X301 (the kitchen one) | T420s (my new one) | Thinkpad T42 (under XP because I need it) | Thinkpad T23 (I looove it !) | T60 (to test OSes) | Another X31 with Smoothwall ready to replace my router...
    ---------------------------
    My Blog : Le Blog de Wilou

    Einmal editiert, zuletzt von wilou62 ()

Jetzt mitmachen!

Sie haben noch kein Benutzerkonto auf unserer Seite? Registrieren Sie sich kostenlos und nehmen Sie an unserer Community teil!