From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Mar 25 15:47:45 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A325D106564A for ; Fri, 25 Mar 2011 15:47:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from telbizov@gmail.com) Received: from mail-qw0-f54.google.com (mail-qw0-f54.google.com [209.85.216.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EE6B8FC0C for ; Fri, 25 Mar 2011 15:47:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: by qwc9 with SMTP id 9so778128qwc.13 for ; Fri, 25 Mar 2011 08:47:44 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=K/1q55EZywOTxAeXT5kJDDJHR5odjM0InvSa3xIkSr8=; b=sLAnuEFiruDaHkaKwf4TPhFG+YdCpeHJjy5cOZOic5uVLtqj36VaNf6jNH/hVbA8r5 hKg15QHE+oHM7TJtfdx7RYKhy0YhyfN2El71543WcZ9lD0wyGm2x1hxq2vhBvhm8me2j AFDzYU3BEhSEzYWz44koKvWar9wJCuOqJHmoY= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=kJ5w/gRcjcFZvLb334lPe4TDzoroPhK+BB4WtQxop4yNKKN6zCGAEjTXbrufeQLYYH ACm3gNjcziX2pGFbzgz+HEuTPVv+bP2AyuScmlw/TKsytlJtr99aNh63d7Zs+edQvz6U mYEFPxKKq6YOvkT+RP5BHChpntjiuVyqXenUs= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.229.127.212 with SMTP id h20mr757485qcs.78.1301068064398; Fri, 25 Mar 2011 08:47:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.229.225.4 with HTTP; Fri, 25 Mar 2011 08:47:44 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <1300618959.2191.5.camel@netti> <1300887484.5930.72.camel@pcdenny> <8CDBE9B8-4834-4F2C-84B9-2DA371D5B2C3@4lin.net> <1301056115.21588.103.camel@pcdenny> Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2011 08:47:44 -0700 Message-ID: From: Rumen Telbizov To: Freddie Cash Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: Denny Schierz , freebsd-stable Subject: Re: SAS HBA LSI 9200-8e supported under 8.2? X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2011 15:47:45 -0000 Good job Denny, I am happy to hear you made it work. On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 7:38 AM, Freddie Cash wrote: > On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 5:28 AM, Denny Schierz wrote: > > So, how complicated is load balancing with two Gb Network cards? :-) Ok, > > that should be a new thread;-) > > Simple as pie. Read through lagg(4) to see how it's done from the > command-line using ifconfig(8). > > ifconfig_lagg0="laggproto round-robin laggport em0 laggport em1 inet > 192.168.0.1/24" > That's actually an interesting problem (although it really belongs to a different thread). Freddie, have you tried this with an HP Procurve (say 2910al) switch. I did and a dual gigabit connection between two machines made the switch cpu utilization to jump from around 1% to 30%. I guess it might be HP specific problem due to the enormous mac address bounce between the two ports. I am curious to know if anybody else has experienced similar problems? It's a really important problem to solve since having zpool's that can achieve a gigabyte a second transfers makes little sense when you are limited by a gigabit (120MB/s) network connection to the rest of the world. Alternative to round-robin is only maybe LACP, but it doesn't really cut it when it comes to transfers between two nodes only due to the hashing that LACP uses. Or maybe 10GbE anyone? Cheers, -- Rumen Telbizov http://telbizov.com