Catlin wrote, >> >> And if RDS were implemented over a connectionless QP, the QP >> savings are even more... >> >> Procs per node uDapl/Sdp Rds/connection oriented conectionless >> 2 19996 9999 1 >> 4 39984 9999 1 >> >> Of coarse, connectionless would require the reliability to be >> done in S/W in addition to the demuxing of packets. >> >> woody >> >>
>It would also require the application to do SAR for all >packets that are larger than the PMTU. One of the benefits >of trying to ride on the SOCK_DGRAM interface is that it >already defines a larger guaranteed message size. I suppose the RDS driver could also handle the SAR (if it were needed) in addition to any retries of lost packets. woody _______________________________________________ openib-general mailing list [email protected] http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
