In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> We seem to have come full circle. My original question was about
> providing a better way for sockets applications to take advantage of
> SAN hardware. W2K Datacenter introduces "Winsock Direct," which will
> bypass the protocol stack when
Pekka> If you used sockets, I believe the normal way to use SAN
Pekka> boards is to just make them look like network cards with a
Pekka> large MTU Sure it works, but it's not very efficient :) (I
Pekka> have to admit I've not played with that kind of toys at
Pekka> all,
On Thu, Jun 28, 2001 at 07:28:20PM +0200, Bogdan Costescu wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Jun 2001, Pekka Pietikainen wrote:
>
> I'm sorry, but I don't understand your reference to MPI here. MPI is a
> high-level API; MPI can run on top of whatever communication features
> exists: TCP/IP, shared memory, VI,
On Wed, 27 Jun 2001, Pekka Pietikainen wrote:
> Providing a wrapper library for use with Infiniband and the current
> SAN boards like WSD would probably be a useful exercise, but to really get
> good performance (especially latency-wise) you probably want to use
> something like MPI. For many
On Wed, 27 Jun 2001, Pekka Pietikainen wrote:
Providing a wrapper library for use with Infiniband and the current
SAN boards like WSD would probably be a useful exercise, but to really get
good performance (especially latency-wise) you probably want to use
something like MPI. For many
On Thu, Jun 28, 2001 at 07:28:20PM +0200, Bogdan Costescu wrote:
On Wed, 27 Jun 2001, Pekka Pietikainen wrote:
I'm sorry, but I don't understand your reference to MPI here. MPI is a
high-level API; MPI can run on top of whatever communication features
exists: TCP/IP, shared memory, VI, etc.
Pekka If you used sockets, I believe the normal way to use SAN
Pekka boards is to just make them look like network cards with a
Pekka large MTU Sure it works, but it's not very efficient :) (I
Pekka have to admit I've not played with that kind of toys at
Pekka all, though)
We
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] you wrote:
We seem to have come full circle. My original question was about
providing a better way for sockets applications to take advantage of
SAN hardware. W2K Datacenter introduces Winsock Direct, which will
bypass the protocol stack when appropriate. The
On Tue, Jun 26, 2001 at 07:36:30AM -0500, Jesse Pollard wrote:
> > I think you misunderstood the point. Microsoft is providing this WSD
> > DLL as a standard part of W2K now. This means that hardware vendors
> > just have to write a SAN service provider, and all Winsock-using
> > applications
On Tue, Jun 26, 2001 at 07:36:30AM -0500, Jesse Pollard wrote:
I think you misunderstood the point. Microsoft is providing this WSD
DLL as a standard part of W2K now. This means that hardware vendors
just have to write a SAN service provider, and all Winsock-using
applications benefit
- Received message begins Here -
>
> > "Pete" == Pete Zaitcev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Roland> The rough idea is that WSD is a new user space library
> Roland> that looks at sockets calls and decides if they have to go
> Roland> through the usual kernel
- Received message begins Here -
Pete == Pete Zaitcev [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Roland The rough idea is that WSD is a new user space library
Roland that looks at sockets calls and decides if they have to go
Roland through the usual kernel network stack, or
> OK, how about an Infiniband network with a TCP/IP gateway at the edge?
> Have we thought about how Linux servers should use the gateway to talk
> to internet hosts? Surely there's no point in running TCP/IP inside
> the Infiniband network, so there needs to be some concept of "socket
> over
> a properly written host based stack works much better in
> the face of a changing environment: Faster CPUs, new CPUs
> (IA-64), new network protocols (ECN). Besides, it is easy
> to "accelerate" a bad network stack, but try to outdo a
> well done stack.
Putting the stack partly in user spacd
> "Pete" == Pete Zaitcev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Roland> The rough idea is that WSD is a new user space library
Roland> that looks at sockets calls and decides if they have to go
Roland> through the usual kernel network stack, or if they can be
Roland> handed off to a
> I'd like to find out if anyone has thought about how Linux will handle
> some of the new network technologies people are starting to push.
> Specifically I'm talking about "System Area Networks," that is, things
> like Infiniband, as well as TCP/IP offload.
Infiniband is doing relatively well,
I'd like to find out if anyone has thought about how Linux will handle
some of the new network technologies people are starting to push.
Specifically I'm talking about "System Area Networks," that is, things
like Infiniband, as well as TCP/IP offload.
In the past people have advocated VIA as a
I'd like to find out if anyone has thought about how Linux will handle
some of the new network technologies people are starting to push.
Specifically I'm talking about System Area Networks, that is, things
like Infiniband, as well as TCP/IP offload.
In the past people have advocated VIA as a way
I'd like to find out if anyone has thought about how Linux will handle
some of the new network technologies people are starting to push.
Specifically I'm talking about System Area Networks, that is, things
like Infiniband, as well as TCP/IP offload.
Infiniband is doing relatively well, as
Pete == Pete Zaitcev [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Roland The rough idea is that WSD is a new user space library
Roland that looks at sockets calls and decides if they have to go
Roland through the usual kernel network stack, or if they can be
Roland handed off to a SAN service
a properly written host based stack works much better in
the face of a changing environment: Faster CPUs, new CPUs
(IA-64), new network protocols (ECN). Besides, it is easy
to accelerate a bad network stack, but try to outdo a
well done stack.
Putting the stack partly in user spacd can
OK, how about an Infiniband network with a TCP/IP gateway at the edge?
Have we thought about how Linux servers should use the gateway to talk
to internet hosts? Surely there's no point in running TCP/IP inside
the Infiniband network, so there needs to be some concept of socket
over
22 matches
Mail list logo
