[ofa-general] IB performance stats (revisited)

[Eitan Zahavi]

In the last months it is the second time I hear people complaining the
current monitoring solution in OFA is  integrated with OpenSM.
These people do not use OpenSM but do use OFED. Another drawback if that
no naming is provided and the reporting uses GUIDs.
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.

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
>