> Quoting Hal Rosenstock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Subject: Re: multicast join failed for... > > On Wed, 2007-04-11 at 14:12, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > > If yes, I'm actually not too happy with this. > > > > > > > > Would something like the following heuristic work better? > > > > - select the max rate between all participants > > > > > > The issue is that one doesn't know all the participants in a group as > > > they are joined dynamically. > > > > > > (I think we've been over this aspect on the list several times in the > > > past.) > > > > That's why I suggest the fix, so that the rate is adapted > > dynamically. > > > > > > - when a host with lower rate joins, destroy the group > > > > > > I don't think a group can be destroyed like this "underneath" its > > > existing members. > > > > > > > Of course it can. That's what happens when SM is restarted. > > Client reregistration ? I don't like using that big hammer as a solution > to this. Seems a little harsh to me.
I think it's not too bad - previously we had some client failing join which is worse. And we can still keep an option to limit the rate manually. > I'm not convinced it's even > required either, How do you mean? All end-points must know the rate is now lower. -- MST _______________________________________________ general mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
