In the last months it is the second time I hear people complaining the current monitoring solution in OFA is integrated with OpenSM. These people do not use OpenSM but do use OFED. Another drawback if that no naming is provided and the reporting uses GUIDs. I also can't hold myself from saying again I think you are going to hit the wall with the concept of doing the PMA from a single node.
Eitan Zahavi Senior Engineering Director, Software Architect Mellanox Technologies LTD Tel:+972-4-9097208 Fax:+972-4-9593245 P.O. Box 586 Yokneam 20692 ISRAEL > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Hal Rosenstock > Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2007 8:12 PM > To: Mark Seger > Cc: Finn, Ed; [email protected] > Subject: Re: [ofa-general] IB performance stats (revisited) > > On Wed, 2007-06-27 at 13:07, Mark Seger wrote: > > >The performance managers deal with the counter stickiness (by > > >resetting them when they think they need to). They > typically export > > >their data although this is not specified by IBA so it is > in a vendor > > >proprietary manner. > > > > > > > > so I guess these guys are poor citizens as well... > > Not sure what you mean. > > > the real issue as I see it then means nobody can trust the data if > > randon tools randomly reset the counters. a real shame... > > I consider this to be a real rather than random app for this. > Guess it depends on what one considers random. > > -- Hal > > > -mark > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > _______________________________________________ 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
