Were you suggesting that the proposed new parameter
"max_rdma_single_rget" be set by the individual btls similar to
"btl_eager_limit"? Seems to me to that is the better approach if I am
to move forward with this.
On 10/06/09 11:14, Don Kerr wrote:
> I agree there is probably a larger issue here and yes this is somewhat
> specific but where as OB1 appears to have multiple protocols depending
> on the capabilities of the BTLs I would not characterize as an IB
> centric problem. Maybe OB1 RDMA problem. There is a clear benefit from
> modifying this specific case. Do you think its not worth making
> incremental improvements while also attacking a potential bigger issue?
> On 10/06/09 10:52, George Bosilca wrote:
>> This seems a very IB centric problem (and solution) going up in the
>> PML. Moreover, I noticed that independent on the BTL we have some
>> problems with the multi-rail performance. As an example on a cluster
>> with 3 GB cards we get the same performance is I enable 2 or 3.
>> Didn't had time to look into the details, but this might be a more
>> general problem.
>> On Oct 6, 2009, at 09:51 , Don Kerr wrote:
>>> I intend to make the change suggested in this ticket to the trunk.
>>> The change does not impact single rail, tested with openib btl, case
>>> and does improve dual rail case. Since it does involve performance
>>> and I am adding a OB1 mca parameter just wanted to check if anyone
>>> was interested or had an issue with it before I committed the change.
>>> devel mailing list
>> devel mailing list
> devel mailing list