Re: [openib-general] IPOIB failover ?
Supporting IPOIB fail over with the Bonding driver will work - we currently use this for GE, etc. On Wed, 2006-09-13 at 14:27 +0300, Or Gerlitz wrote: Richard Frank wrote: Does IPOIB in this stack support transparent fail over between ports and across redundant HCAs using a virtual IP ? I am working on a patch to the linux bonding driver which will allow it to enslave also IPoIB devices for the active-backup mode. I will send an RFC to netdev for review next week. Does this meets your needs? Does by virtual IP you mean an ***alias address*** assigned at one point of time to one ipoib device and in another point of time (eg during fail-over) to a second ipoib device? does this approach have any advantage on the bonding approach? Or. ___ openib-general mailing list openib-general@openib.org http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general ___ openib-general mailing list openib-general@openib.org http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
[openib-general] IPOIB failover ?
Does IPOIB in this stack support transparent fail over between ports and across redundant HCAs using a virtual IP ? ___ openib-general mailing list openib-general@openib.org http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
RE: [openib-general] How do we prevent starvation say between TCP over IPOIB / and SRP traffic ?
Currently, all I have is problem to resolve. We will think about a general model.. For Oracle to support running RAC on a single fabric - assuming the fabric is utilized for both network (inter node cluster com) plus storage I/O - we need to limit /control latencies of cluster network msgs such that increasing the storage I/O load does not impact the QoS requirements for cluster network comm. A globally set service level / QoS for cluster network traffic such that it has better / more stringent QoS requirements than storage I/O traffic would meet our needs. However, having the capability to define service levels on a per connection or ULP or process basis is interesting too. On Wed, 2006-04-19 at 09:44 -0700, Caitlin Bestler wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Some application level protocols - require higher QoS levels than others - for various communication and I/O operations. For example, cluster inter-node health msgs have fixed latency requirements that if exceeded may result in unexpected node removals from the cluster. Are there any mechanisms available to the client process to manage the QoS level for the various supported ULPs (SDP,TCP,UDP,RDS,SRP,iSER,etc) either at the ULP level or some combination of process and ULP - or perhaps even at the connection level ? Using the same example, the cluster node monitors might set the priority / QoS level of the heart beats to be more important than normal SRP/iSER traffic to ensure no starvation ? Working up from hardware capabilities and trying to generalize them probably won't lead anywhere. Do you have a model of the requirements for transport/device neutral QP prioritization that would meet your needs? ___ openib-general mailing list openib-general@openib.org http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
[openib-general] How do we prevent starvation say between TCP over IPOIB / and SRP traffic ?
Some application level protocols - require higher QoS levels than others - for various communication and I/O operations. For example, cluster inter-node health msgs have fixed latency requirements that if exceeded may result in unexpected node removals from the cluster. Are there any mechanisms available to the client process to manage the QoS level for the various supported ULPs (SDP,TCP,UDP,RDS,SRP,iSER,etc) either at the ULP level or some combination of process and ULP - or perhaps even at the connection level ? Using the same example, the cluster node monitors might set the priority / QoS level of the heart beats to be more important than normal SRP/iSER traffic to ensure no starvation ? ___ openib-general mailing list openib-general@openib.org http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
Re: [openib-general] How do we prevent starvation say between TCP over IPOIB / and SRP traffic ?
This discussion assumes a single fabric (e.g IB, or iWARP, etc) for network and file I/O between a set of nodes sharing storage. On Wed, 2006-04-19 at 12:38 -0400, Richard Frank wrote: Some application level protocols - require higher QoS levels than others - for various communication and I/O operations. For example, cluster inter-node health msgs have fixed latency requirements that if exceeded may result in unexpected node removals from the cluster. Are there any mechanisms available to the client process to manage the QoS level for the various supported ULPs (SDP,TCP,UDP,RDS,SRP,iSER,etc) either at the ULP level or some combination of process and ULP - or perhaps even at the connection level ? Using the same example, the cluster node monitors might set the priority / QoS level of the heart beats to be more important than normal SRP/iSER traffic to ensure no starvation ? ___ openib-general mailing list openib-general@openib.org http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general ___ openib-general mailing list openib-general@openib.org http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
[openib-general] Are atomics planned / available via Gen2 ?
Is there a common set available over iWARP / IB ? ___ openib-general mailing list openib-general@openib.org http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
[openib-general] SDP - What are the platforms that support SDP ?
Besides OpenIB for Linux and Windows ? Solaris ? AIX ? HP-UX ? Are there any plans for interoperability tests / have any completed ? ___ openib-general mailing list openib-general@openib.org http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
Re: [openib-general] SDP - What are the platforms that support SDP ?
What platforms does IT-API inter-operate with ? OK - for HPUX we can fall back to normal TCP / sockets - for the stream mode cases. Any platform that supports SDP will have a distinct performance advantage - especially if it supports zero copy. W.R.T. RDS - we are moving to RDS as a replacement for IT-API / uDAPL / and standard UDP. Again any platform with support for RDS will have a significant performance advantage. We will fall back to running with UDP on HPUX. On Thu, 2006-01-05 at 12:27 -0800, Grant Grundler wrote: On Thu, Jan 05, 2006 at 02:59:43PM -0500, Richard Frank wrote: Besides OpenIB for Linux and Windows ? HP-UX ? Almost certainly not for HPUX. Oracle should plan on continuing to use existing IT-API interface. I'm told it's known to work and meets HP's requirements (which RDS does not AFAICT). grant ___ openib-general mailing list openib-general@openib.org http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general ___ openib-general mailing list openib-general@openib.org http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
RE: [openib-general] SDP - What are the platforms that support SDP ?
We need both - each for different Oracle clients / functionality with respective connection models / modes of operation (stream vs datagram). BTW - Oracle currently uses TCP streams / SDP for Client / middle tier connectivity to the database. We use UDP / RDS within the database for inter database instance communication. We are planning on using TCP streams / SDP for additional functionality - specifically for its AIO + zero copy capability - on platforms that support it. On Thu, 2006-01-05 at 16:43 -0800, Sean Hefty wrote: Any platform that supports SDP will have a distinct performance advantage - especially if it supports zero copy. W.R.T. RDS - we are moving to RDS as a replacement for IT-API / uDAPL / and standard UDP. Are you planning on using SDP or RDS? What platforms will have RDS that will not have SDP? - Sean ___ openib-general mailing list openib-general@openib.org http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general ___ openib-general mailing list openib-general@openib.org http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
RE: [openib-general] SDP - What are the platforms that support SDP ?
We also use TCP streams for disaster recovery archiving involving very large amounts of data. We would like to move this to SDP via AIO too. On Thu, 2006-01-05 at 20:07 -0500, Richard Frank wrote: We need both - each for different Oracle clients / functionality with respective connection models / modes of operation (stream vs datagram). BTW - Oracle currently uses TCP streams / SDP for Client / middle tier connectivity to the database. We use UDP / RDS within the database for inter database instance communication. We are planning on using TCP streams / SDP for additional functionality - specifically for its AIO + zero copy capability - on platforms that support it. On Thu, 2006-01-05 at 16:43 -0800, Sean Hefty wrote: Any platform that supports SDP will have a distinct performance advantage - especially if it supports zero copy. W.R.T. RDS - we are moving to RDS as a replacement for IT-API / uDAPL / and standard UDP. Are you planning on using SDP or RDS? What platforms will have RDS that will not have SDP? - Sean ___ openib-general mailing list openib-general@openib.org http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general ___ openib-general mailing list openib-general@openib.org http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general ___ openib-general mailing list openib-general@openib.org http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
Re: [openib-general] [ANNOUNCE] Contribute RDS (Reliable Datagram Sockets) to OpenIB
We do not see any deficiencies - the RDS specification and current implementation so far meet our requirements and is working very well. There is more we will want to do further down the road - such as access the RDS sockets via AIO so we can add zero copy support. On Thu, 2005-12-01 at 08:16 -0800, Grant Grundler wrote: On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 03:23:46PM -0800, Roland Dreier wrote: Any progress to report on the port of RDS from the SilverStorm proprietary stack to the standard Linux stack? I think it would really move the discussion forward if there were some code that people could build and use. As primary consumer of RDS, I think Oracle first needs to decide if the deficiencies that Mike Krause pointed out are acceptable or not. grant ___ openib-general mailing list openib-general@openib.org http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general ___ openib-general mailing list openib-general@openib.org http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
Re: [dat-discussions] RE: [openib-general] Re: iWARP emulationprotocol
Title: Message Oracle currently depends on 64 bytes of private data for connect and accept. - Original Message - From: Kanevsky, Arkady To: Davis, Arlin R ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; Grant Grundler Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; openib-general@openib.org Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2005 11:31 AM Subject: RE: [dat-discussions] RE: [openib-general] Re: iWARP emulationprotocol Arlin, just to clarify, Intel MPI will not have problems with useing less than 64 bytes of private data. Ifa solution will provide you with 48 bytes of private data will it be sufficient? Arkady Arkady Kanevsky email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Network Appliance phone: 781-768-5395 375 Totten Pond Rd. Fax: 781-895-1195 Waltham, MA 02451-2010 central phone: 781-768-5300 -Original Message-From: Davis, Arlin R [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2005 11:30 AMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Grant GrundlerCc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; openib-general@openib.orgSubject: RE: [dat-discussions] RE: [openib-general] Re: iWARP emulationprotocol Arkady, Intel MPI (real consumer of uDAPL) has no problem with this change. -arlin From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kanevsky, ArkadySent: Wednesday, October 19, 2005 6:40 AMTo: Grant Grundler; Caitlin BestlerCc: Roland Dreier; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; openib-general@openib.orgSubject: [dat-discussions] RE: [openib-general] Re: iWARP emulation protocol Grant,The developers of the application(s) in questions are aware of thediscussion.I will leave it to them to respond.I bring the discussion point at the weekly DAT Collaborative meetingwhich we have every Wednesday.I appologize that the DAT Collaborative charter does not allowto submit contribution without joining DAT Collaborative.But this is no different from Linux not accepting any contrubutionswithout proper license.Byt be rest assure that as a Chair I bring the concernsand suggestions stated in email discussion at the DAT meetings.ArkadyArkady Kanevsky email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Network Appliance phone: 781-768-5395375 Totten Pond Rd. Fax: 781-895-1195Waltham, MA 02451-2010 central phone: 781-768-5300 -Original Message- From: Grant Grundler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2005 8:02 PM To: Caitlin Bestler Cc: Grant Grundler; Roland Dreier; Kanevsky, Arkady; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; openib-general@openib.org Subject: Re: [openib-general] Re: iWARP emulation protocol On Tue, Oct 18, 2005 at 04:40:54PM -0700, Caitlin Bestler wrote: Roland (and the rest of us) would like to see someone name a real consumer of the proposed interface. ie who depends onthis change? Then the dependency for that use/user can be discussed and appropriate tradeoffs made. Make sense?Unfortunately not every application that is under development, or even deployed, can be discussed in a google-searchable public forum. That especially applies to user-mode development. Well, this is open source. While I don't want to preclude closed source developement, it's usually necessary to have an open source consumer that any open source developer can test with. So I could have actually tested such applications and still not be free to cite them here. Understood. I'm not asking *you* to cite one unless you happen to own one of the consumers. With any luck some of them are following the discussion and will jump in on their own. Unfortunately, since they are developing to uDAPL they are unlikely to be following this discussion. It doesn't help that the DAT yahoo-groups.com mailing list is rejecting my replies. It would be helpful if someone following this forum could share Roland's question with DAT mailing list if it didn't make it there already and possibly explain why naming a consumer is necessary. hth, grant SPONSORED LINKS Protocol Communication and networking Wireless communication and networking YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS Visit your group "dat-discussions" on the web. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. ___ openib-general mailing list openib-general@openib.org
