Ambassadors group | XCP-ng and XO forum

tjkreidl

@john.c Indeed, John, and I almost forgot that the backup network on each host was actually on a separate, isolated NIC, and not at all on the VLAN.

tjkreidl

@john.c Keeping the various network traffic isolated according to specific usage (management, storage, VMs, etc.) is always a good idea. The last system I managed had 10GiB LACP bonds and using VLANs to isolate traffic and that worked fine with a four-node pool running around 80 or so XenDesktop instances per node. Never experienced any congestion issues. Each dom0 had a ton of memory and I believe it was either 8 or 16 VCPUs to make sure there were sufficient compute and memory allocations to allow for sometimes very heavy loads. It also helped that I eventually added GPUs to take on some of the computational load, in particular when some of the VMs were running applications employing heavy graphics.

tjkreidl

@carloum70 One option to address the HA error messages: Delete the HA configuration and re-configure it from scratch once the bonds are all configured OK, which it appears you think they now are.

tjkreidl

@john.c Most interesting, and I fully agree, that a strong host model enforcement policy is really the best and only recourse for such a topology, or so it would seem.
The only other option that comes to mind would be to not put the heartbeat connection on any sort of bond or multipath. That's, of course, not ideal.

tjkreidl

@john.c Interesting information about the strong v. weak host model.
Active-active and LACP bonds will split the network traffic between the NICs, while an active-passive bond only uses the primary. WHat type of bonds do you have set up?

Ambassadors

Posts

Member List