[ofa-general] IB performance stats (revisited)
Eitan Zahavi
eitan at mellanox.co.il
Wed Jul 11 03:51:16 PDT 2007
Hi Ira,
> Second, I have run some tests querying the fabric of our
> large clusters here (~500 nodes) and the results were
> promising for a single node implementation.
> I don't recall the numbers as this was a while ago but it was
> on the order of
> <2 sec and I think <1 but I don't want to be misquoted.
Does PerfMgr query switch ports ?
If it does I am surprised by the short sweep time you got.
Does it have >1 query on the wire at a given time?
If not then I am even more surprised.
Was the cluster running a job at the time of the query ?
Thanks
Eitan Zahavi
Senior Engineering Director, Software Architect
Mellanox Technologies LTD
Tel:+972-4-9097208
Fax:+972-4-9593245
P.O. Box 586 Yokneam 20692 ISRAEL
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ira Weiny [mailto:weiny2 at llnl.gov]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2007 7:47 PM
> To: Eitan Zahavi
> Cc: halr at voltaire.com; Mark.Seger at hp.com;
> general at lists.openfabrics.org; Ed.Finn at FMR.COM
> Subject: Re: [ofa-general] IB performance stats (revisited)
>
> On Thu, 28 Jun 2007 10:24:59 +0300
> "Eitan Zahavi" <eitan at mellanox.co.il> wrote:
>
> > > On Wed, 2007-06-27 at 14:23, Eitan Zahavi wrote:
> > > > In the last months it is the second time I hear people
> > > complaining the
> > > > current monitoring solution in OFA is integrated with OpenSM.
> > >
> > > I must have missed this both times (didn't see this in Mark's
> > > post) and the statement itself is somewhat inaccurate as well.
> > Private talks - I hope they will speak up for themselves now...
> > >
> > > > These people do not use OpenSM but do use OFED.
> > >
> > > I'm not sure I'm following what you mean here.
> > >
> > > If you mean that some people want to run PerfMgr without
> the SM/SA
> > > aspects (so that they can run a vendor based SM), that is
> the next
> > > thing we are adding to the implementation.
> > Exactly. OK when is that coming?
>
> There is very little which ties the current PerfMgr to
> OpenSM. Basically it just gets the current fabric topology.
> As Hal has said changes are coming.
>
> >
> > >
> > > > Another drawback if that
> > > > no naming is provided and the reporting uses GUIDs.
> > >
> > > Naming is provided via NodeDescription.
> > This might be good for hosts but is not covering switches ...
>
> It does include switches. However, since most systems have
> the same name for multiple switches this becomes ineffective.
> I have queried Voltaire for a way to change the
> NodeDescription for switches, but at the time I asked, there
> was no way to do it. Perhaps there is now? What about other
> vendors? This is why ibnetdiscover and other diags have
> "switch map" support. (A GUID->name mapping to override the
> default NodeDescription.) Nothing would please me more than
> to be able to remove that for a more "automatic" solution.
>
> > >
> > > > I also can't hold myself from saying again I think you
> are going
> > > > to hit the wall with the concept of doing the PMA from
> a single node.
> > >
> > > If you are referring to the fact the PerMgr is currently not
> > > distributed, that will be done as has been stated before.
> > Good. When is it expected? Will it be OFED 1.3?
>
> When Hal first sent out the PerfMgr design I thought we
> should jump right to the distributed model as well. But now
> I am glad we have gone the way we did.
> First off, we have something which "works" and from which we
> can expand.
> Second, I have run some tests querying the fabric of our
> large clusters here (~500 nodes) and the results were
> promising for a single node implementation.
> I don't recall the numbers as this was a while ago but it was
> on the order of
> <2 sec and I think <1 but I don't want to be misquoted.
>
> For sure, a distributed model offers many advantages and we
> will get there. But for many the current single node
> approach should work just fine.
>
> Thanks,
> Ira
>
> >
> > Thanks
> > >
> > > -- Hal
> > >
> > > > Eitan Zahavi
> > > > Senior Engineering Director, Software Architect Mellanox
> > > Technologies
> > > > LTD
> > > > Tel:+972-4-9097208
> > > > Fax:+972-4-9593245
> > > > P.O. Box 586 Yokneam 20692 ISRAEL
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: general-bounces at lists.openfabrics.org
> > > > > [mailto:general-bounces at lists.openfabrics.org] On
> Behalf Of Hal
> > > > > Rosenstock
> > > > > Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2007 8:12 PM
> > > > > To: Mark Seger
> > > > > Cc: Finn, Ed; general at lists.openfabrics.org
> > > > > Subject: Re: [ofa-general] IB performance stats (revisited)
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, 2007-06-27 at 13:07, Mark Seger wrote:
> > > > > > >The performance managers deal with the counter
> stickiness (by
> > > > > > >resetting them when they think they need to). They
> > > > > typically export
> > > > > > >their data although this is not specified by IBA so it is
> > > > > in a vendor
> > > > > > >proprietary manner.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > so I guess these guys are poor citizens as well...
> > > > >
> > > > > Not sure what you mean.
> > > > >
> > > > > > the real issue as I see it then means nobody can trust
> > > the data if
> > > > > > randon tools randomly reset the counters. a real shame...
> > > > >
> > > > > I consider this to be a real rather than random app for this.
> > > > > Guess it depends on what one considers random.
> > > > >
> > > > > -- Hal
> > > > >
> > > > > > -mark
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > 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
> > > > >
> > >
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
> >
>
More information about the general
mailing list