On Sat, Sep 6, 2008 at 13:11, Mag Gam <magawake at gmail.com> wrote: > Actually, would there be a big performance boost when using mode4? Not necessarily, since balance-rr already gives you load-balancing. They actually implement it differently. balance-rr can spread packets of the same TCP connection across the two links, so you may use your links more, but with the side effect of having your packets delivered out of order. In 802.3ad all packets of a single TCP connection will use the same link, this means your links will not be as balanced as what you get with balance-rr, but it will not require reordering on the other side of the connection. Check section 12.1.1 in /usr/share/doc/iputils-*/README.bonding . In any case, you should evaluate what your needs are and tune for that. > Currently I am seeing 95% total throughput. If you have only a few clients doing huge transfers, 802.3ad will probably not be as good as balance-rr for that. Again, you should tune it for your needs. > Which isn't that bad. I am > peaking at 238MB/sec (each gig/e connections) I believe you mean 238MB/sec on both interfaces, since 1Gbps = 125MB/s. > Also, mode0 does fault tolerance, meaning if a switch failure occurs > we should still be good, but how would the packets then be > transferred? I suppose rr would be disabled since it won't need to > alternate, correct? Actually balance-rr is still there, it is only doing round-robin of one interface only. Remember, you could have a bonding of 3, 4 or more interfaces, in that case if you loose one you still have more than one to balance traffic through. Filipe