[116928] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Alternatives to storm-control on Cat 6509.
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (David Hughes)
Wed Aug 26 18:57:02 2009
From: David Hughes <David@hughes.com.au>
To: Mike Bartz <mob@bartzfamily.net>
In-Reply-To: <82a67ea80908251321u2217d3en30bff225bd7ccf8a@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2009 08:14:48 +1000
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 26/08/2009, at 6:21 AM, Mike Bartz wrote:
> We experienced the joy of using the X6148 cards with a SAN/ESX
> cluster.
> Lots of performance issues! A fairly inexpensive solution was to
> switch to
> the X6148A card instead, which does not suffer the the 8:1
> oversubscription. It also supports MTU's larger than 1500, which was
> another shortcoming of the older card.
Actually, the "A" variant of the x6148 is still 8:1 oversubscribed.
The significant difference between the x6148 and x6148a is the buffer
size. The original card had 1.4MB of buffer per port group (8 ports)
while the "A" upgrade supports 5.5MB per port. Oh, that and support
for 9k jumbo frames.
It's still a classic bus card, it still has the same QoS queues, and
is still 8:1 over subscribed.
David
...
