[gpfsug-discuss] Not recommended, but why not?

[Jonathan Buzzard]

On 04/05/18 18:30, Bryan Banister wrote:
> You also have to be careful with network utilization… we have some very 
> hungry NFS clients in our environment and the NFS traffic can actually 
> DOS other services that need to use the network links.  If you configure 
> GPFS admin/daemon traffic over the same link as the SMB/NFS traffic then 
> this could lead to GPFS node evictions if disk leases cannot get 
> renewed.  You could limit the amount that SMV/NFS use on the network 
> with something like the tc facility if you’re sharing the network 
> interfaces for GPFS and CES services.
> 

The right answer to that IMHO is a separate VLAN for the GPFS 
command/control traffic that is prioritized above all other VLAN's. Do 
something like mark it as a voice VLAN. Basically don't rely on some OS 
layer to do the right thing at layer three, enforce it at layer two in 
the switches.

JAB.

-- 
Jonathan A. Buzzard                         Tel: +44141-5483420
HPC System Administrator, ARCHIE-WeSt.
University of Strathclyde, John Anderson Building, Glasgow. G4 0NG