On Tue, 2006-01-31 at 12:44, Sean Hefty wrote: > Or Gerlitz wrote: > > Why not having a failed lookup as the --only-- trigger to update the > > cache? so the cache contains only paths that were demanded by some > > consumer. What is implementation you were considering, is it an SA > > replica having all those paths whose sgid is the local node gid? > > I view MPI as one of the primary reasons for having a cache. The cache is > updated using an SA GET_TABLE request, which is more efficient than sending > separate SA GET requests for each path record. Waiting for a failed lookup > to > create the initial cache would delay the startup time for apps wanting > all-to-all connection establishment. In this case, we also get the side > effect > that the SA receives GET_TABLE requests from every node at roughly the same > time. > > Your assumption is correct. The implementation will contain copies of all > path > records whose SGID is a local node GID. (Currently it contains only a single > path record per SGID/DGID, but that will be expanded.)
Ultimately, this should likely be using MultiPathRecord as it is able to do some things PathRecords can't. -- Hal _______________________________________________ openib-general mailing list [email protected] http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
