Dave: The problem we are working to resolve now involves calling native IB in a loopback fashion. Under TCP, loopback works fine, but IB doesn't understand loopback, unless you implement it yourself. In the past, PVFS never used loopback calls; however, when distributed directories was implemented, loopback was used. At the same time, we are merging IB code written by a 3rd party. So, between the two, native IB is just not ready yet. The loopback issues have been resolved and testing of the merged code is underway with 2.9.
As far as I know, native IB works with 2.8.x. Sorry for the confusion! Becky www.orangefs.org On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 11:59 AM, Dave Love <[email protected]> wrote: > Becky Ligon <[email protected]> writes: > > > Dave: > > > > At Clemson, we have been using IPoIB for a few years without any > problems, > > but I don't have any performance comparisons. > > > > The OFS development team has "fixed" the initial problems that we saw > with > > IB and distributed directories and are now going through some more > > testing. When we are confident that IB will work, we will create another > > release, and ensure the release notes indicate this. In the 2.9.2 > release > > notes, there is an entry indicating that IB is in development. > > Thanks, but it wasn't clear to me that meant that IB support doesn't > work, rather than it had some developments. > > Could you say in what way it's broken, and when it last worked (assuming > it did, as pvfs.org suggests)? I've run through the IMB-IO with it, > apparently successfully, but haven't had a chance to compare with IPoIB > and run something more realistic. > _______________________________________________ > Pvfs2-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.beowulf-underground.org/mailman/listinfo/pvfs2-users >
_______________________________________________ Pvfs2-users mailing list [email protected] http://www.beowulf-underground.org/mailman/listinfo/pvfs2-users
