[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       lustre-discuss
Subject:    [Lustre-discuss] Benchmarking lustre with iozone
From:       Brian.Murrell () Sun ! COM (Brian J !  Murrell)
Date:       2009-06-22 17:04:22
Message-ID: 1245690262.24333.37.camel () pc ! interlinx ! bc ! ca
[Download RAW message or body]

On Fri, 2009-06-19 at 12:32 +0100, Christopher J.Walker wrote:
> With debugging turned on, I saw one packet missing in the 
> output when it had hung. Unfortunately, on a network I'm saturating with 
> lustre traffic, the odd packet UDP packet is bound to get lost...

Why not use a multi-node benchmark that uses something with more
reliable delivery than a(n itself unreliable) protocol built on an
unreliable transport?

IOR would fit this bill as it uses MPI for interclient communications,
which itself will use rsh (or equivalent) as it's internode transport.

b.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.lustre.org/pipermail/lustre-discuss/attachments/20090622/26049db0/attachment.bin 

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]