On Sun, 2007-07-01 at 15:05, Gleb Natapov wrote: > On Sun, Jul 01, 2007 at 07:27:24PM +0300, Dror Goldenberg wrote: > > > SSQ is needed for scalability, no need to explain this (by > > > the way RD is needed for the same reason too. What's Mellanox > > > plan to support it? > > > > RD is not supported in hardware today. Implementing RD is extremely > > complicated. To solve the scalability issues on MPI like applications > > we believe that SRC and SSQ are the right solutions. It is much simpler > > for implementation by both software and hardware. By MPI-like I refer > > to applications that have some level of trust between two processes of > > the > > same application. RD also has some performance issues as it only > > supports one message in the air. Those performance issues are solved > > by design in SRC/SSQ. > > > Didn't know about RD limitation. Is this shortcomings of IB spec or > general limitation of reliable datagram? RD looks much nice to me then > SRC/SSQ.
I think Dror is referring to number of messages in flight per EEC and number of messages in flight per QP being limited to 1 per IBA spec. Number of messages enqueued per EEC/QP is implementation dependent. -- Hal [snip...] _______________________________________________ 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
