linuxdcpp-team team mailing list archive

[Razzloss <question132219@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Question #132219 on LinuxDC++ changed:
https://answers.launchpad.net/linuxdcpp/+question/132219

    Status: Open => Answered

Razzloss proposed the following answer:
I'd recommend bonding the interfaces if at all possible, but

1. If you haven't changed the bind address (defined in the experts only
tab) Linuxdcpp will listen for connections on all interfaces/addresses.
In this case it is up to the OS to route the upstream traffic. Dividing
incoming traffic between interfaces is probably not possible with
multiple addresses. (At least I can't come up with anything at the
moment)

2. a) Running multiple instances is perfectly fine. Only limitation is that they must not share the same profile directory (actually it should prevent the attempt to use the same profile dir for two or more instances). So you can redefine your HOME environment variable so that they all point to different places for each instance.
For example to start 2 instances one could use something like the following  (from xterm)
HOME=$HOME/Person1 linuxdcpp &
HOME=$HOME/Person2 linuxdcpp &

This will create two different profile directories each in
$HOME/PersonX/.dc++/ and you can bind each of the instances to a
different port/address. This might work in dividing the up and down
traffic between interfaces, but I'd guess this is also up to the OS, try
and see how it behaves.

b) I'd drop this idea since running multiple instances has way less
overhead. Particularly with vmware (haven't been able to get a decent IO
speed with it even with 3 RAID0 15k SAS disks).

--RZ

-- 
You received this question notification because you are a member of
LinuxDC++ Team, which is an answer contact for LinuxDC++.