[ofa-general] Re: [OpenSM] updn routing performance fix???

[Hal Rosenstock]

Hi Al,

On Sun, 2008-03-02 at 07:16 -0800, Albert Chu wrote:
> Hey Hal,
> 
> Are you saying a flag inside each osm_switch_t to indicate if that
> specific switch is balanced?

I wasn't saying anything about implementation. I was saying there could
be OpenSM console commands to 1. rebalance, and 2. display relevant
state regarding balance/imbalance.

> The script I wrote for the balance check did have difficulty determining a
> lot of corner cases (is port connected to a CA? is it active?  what ports
> are up vs. down links, etc.).  At the end of the day you just output a lot
> of extra info and have to look through it manually.
> 
> Although probably not easy as a whole, these calculations would be easier
> in opensm since that information is available.

That's what I was suggesting rather than a separate diag script although
the latter seems like it would be good too.

-- Hal

> Al
> 
> > On 05:04 Sun 02 Mar     , Hal Rosenstock wrote:
> >> On Sat, 2008-03-01 at 22:53 +0000, Sasha Khapyorsky wrote:
> >> > On 19:59 Fri 29 Feb     , Hal Rosenstock wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > If that makes sense, then also query commands on this "state" would
> >> > > likely also.
> >> >
> >> > Not sure about this. It is dynamically updated flag, so it would be
> >> hard
> >> > to catch a "valid" value by hand from the OpenSM console.
> >>
> >> I was referring to the "balance" state not that flag. Does that make
> >> more sense ?
> >
> > What do you mean? Routing dumps?
> >
> > Sasha
> > _______________________________________________
> > general mailing list
> > general at lists.openfabrics.org
> > http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/general
> >
> > To unsubscribe, please visit
> > http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
> >
> 
>