On 6/12/08, Hal Rosenstock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Tue, 2008-06-10 at 05:59 +0300, Sasha Khapyorsky wrote: > > Basically this addresses the problem described by Al Chu in: > > > > http://lists.openfabrics.org/pipermail/general/2008-April/049132.html > > > > When base lid paths become completely disbalanced on a fabrics with > > lmc > 0. > > > > One feedback was from Yiftah Shahar: > > > > "I think that our requirements should be that even when you are working > > with LMC>0 then the base LID routing should not be affected. > > > One way to achieve this goal is to first run the base-LID routing (so > > all base LID improvement will be also in LMC>0) and then start with the > > other LIDs as round-robbing starting from the base-lid-port + 1 > > according current routing algorithm rules (keeping min-hop, up/down...)." > > > > We had some discussion with Al and Yiftah about this and considered that > > in addition to "pure" base lid paths preservation (which is good thing by > > itself) proposed method solves original lid disbalancing problem as well. > > Would you elaborate on the motivation behind the requirement to > maintain/preserve the base LID routing ? > > -- Hal
LMC > 0 is mainly used by MPI, all other protocols / applications will use only one LID (PATH), therefore we should make sure that performance of these protocols / applications will not be effected if fabric is configured with LMC > 0 _______________________________________________ > 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
