[gpfsug-discuss] GPFS Network Configuration - 1 Daemon Network , 1 Admin Network

[Simon Thompson (IT Research Support)]

If you have network congestion, then a separate admin network is of benefit. Maybe less important if you have 10GbE networks, but if (for example), you normally rely on IB to talk data, and gpfs fails back to the Ethernet (which may be only 1GbE), then you may have cluster issues, for example missing gpfs pings.

Having a separate physical admin network can protect you from this.

Having been bitten by this several years back, it's a good idea IMHO to have a separate admin network.

Simon
________________________________________
From: gpfsug-discuss-bounces at spectrumscale.org [gpfsug-discuss-bounces at spectrumscale.org] on behalf of J. Eric Wonderley [eric.wonderley at vt.edu]
Sent: 10 April 2017 17:58
To: gpfsug main discussion list
Subject: Re: [gpfsug-discuss] GPFS Network Configuration - 1 Daemon Network , 1 Admin Network

1)  You want more that one quorum node on your server cluster.  The non-quorum node does need a daemon network interface exposed to the client cluster as does the quorum nodes.

2)  No.  Admin network is for intra cluster communications...not inter cluster(between clusters).  Daemon interface(port 1191) is used for communications between clusters.  I think there is little benefit gained by having designated an admin network...maybe someone can point out benefits of an admin network.



Eric Wonderley

On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 12:47 PM, Hans-Joachim Ehlers <service at metamodul.com<mailto:service at metamodul.com>> wrote:

My understanding of the GPFS networks is not quite clear.

For an GPFS setup i would like to use 2 Networks

1 Daemon (data)  network using port 1191 using for example. 10.1.1.0/24<http://10.1.1.0/24>

2 Admin Network using for example: 192.168.1.0/24<http://192.168.1.0/24> network

Questions

1) Thus in a 2+1 Cluster ( 2 GPFS Server + 1 Quorum Server ) Config -  Does the Tiebreaker Node needs to have access to the daemon(data) 10.1.1. network or is it sufficient for the tiebreaker node to be configured as part of the admin 192.168.1 network ?

2) Does a remote cluster needs access to the GPFS Admin 192.168.1 network or is it sufficient for the remote cluster to access the 10.1.1 network ? If so i assume that remotecluster commands and ping to/from remote cluster are going via the Daemon network ?

Note:

I am aware and read https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/community/wikis/home?lang=en#!/wiki/General%20Parallel%20File%20System%20(GPFS)/page/GPFS%20Network%20Communication%20Overview

--
Unix Systems Engineer
--------------------------------------------------
MetaModul GmbH
Süderstr. 12
25336 Elmshorn
HRB: 11873 PI
UstID: DE213701983
Mobil: + 49 177 4393994<tel:+49%20177%204393994>
Mail: service at metamodul.com<mailto:service at metamodul.com>

_______________________________________________
gpfsug-discuss mailing list
gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org<http://spectrumscale.org>
http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss