On Thu, 2006-11-02 at 17:54, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > Quoting r. Arlin Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Subject: Re: [openib-general] scaling issues, was: uDAPL cma: add support > > for address and route retries, call disconnect when recving dreq > > > > Sean Hefty wrote: > > > > >One option is having the SA (or ib_umad?) return a busy status in response > > >to a > > >MAD, but we'd still have to be able to send this response as quickly as > > >requests > > >are being received. We could then limit the number of requests that would > > >be > > >queued in the kernel for a user. > > > > > > > > > > Another great option would be to have path record caching. Unfortunately > > OFED 1.1 did not include ib_local_sa in the release. > > > > This won't help you much. > With 256 nodes all to all already gives you 65000 requests > which is the same order of magnitude as the reported 130000.
The requests might occur at a different time so they could be spread out rather than synchronized. -- 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
