Hi Goswin, On Fri, Sep 08, 2006 at 03:34:40PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote: > > > >> The 2.6.16 code I have works for light use: survives some tests such as > >> bonnie, etc. > >> but hangs in large workloads: I'm debugging this, but would prefer to > >> target 2.6.17 for Etch. > >> (even if we don't get in the Etch release, I'd like to support the > >> stable kernel.) Some patches > >> ported to 2.6.17. > > > > Out of curiousity what sort of heavy workloads are you trying out on the > > system? > > > > I'd be interested in testing the package out on a small test cluster > > here as well for users who have heavy IO needs. > > We usualy do a burn-in test that continiously copies a linux source > tree to a new dir and compares it. And that with a few clients. > > Also some benchmarks like bonnie with 1-x clients to see how it > scales. > > > also is there any interest in testing these patches for 2.6.16/17 with > > with the openib patches/stacks? > > For that I'm waiting for 2.6.18. I'm assuming you mean the openib2 > driver in the vanilla kernel and not the (extra) melanox drivers. With > 2.6.15 we patch in the melanox drivers. >
I guess i didnt phrase my initial mail too well, but yes openib2 in the vanilla kernel + lustre it is something I would like to test. though we havent sucessfully gotten openib2 to work correctly on our compute systems so we havent looked at lustre + openib2 yet. i guess we should look at getting openib2 working correctly at our site before i post more to this list in relation to openib2+lustre. Thanks, Jimmy. -- Jimmy Tang Trinity Centre for High Performance Computing, Lloyd Building, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin 2, Ireland. http://www.tchpc.tcd.ie/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
