question about Bonding tools

liuxg beowulf at
Sun Oct 22 00:51:13 PDT 2000

Hello ,Bill Northrup,
     I will use a new switch to substitute the poor switch.Through cisco is 
expensive, it may be a good choice in long term.
    Thanks for you advice again.It's important to me.

00-10-22 22:20:00£º
>Chris and Florent,
>Well I am not to familiar with your switch, but it appears to be the
>problem. Before we go into depth on switching technology's, I would like to
>ask you a little about the application that we are talking about. I am very
>new to Beowulfs so I will operate under a few assumptions. The 3500 series
>(the 3548 XL caught my eye) seems to be a nice choice.
>1)That  you have identified that network bandwidth is the current bottleneck
>in the system?  I believe that bonding adds a little overhead to the node as
>well cost and  latency. Is the amount of anticipated speed up for you
>application worth the additional cost?
>2) how many nodes?
>3) How does latency effect your application? Is it large amounts of data
>with long computer times or is small and bursty with time sensitivity to
>overall system performance? If it was the large data model with higher
>tolerance for latency I would select either a store and forward type switch
>or cut through. For the time sensitive I would chose the cut through. To be
>honest I am grasping at this one, because I do not know how these numbers
>affect the Beowulf. Store and forward= buffer the entire frame and check CRC
>before forwarding out the destination port. Cut through = begin forwarding
>it out the destination port before the end of the frame, no crc check..
>I have many consultant tools and connections available to me, I would be
>more than happy to help you narrow down some switches with just a little
>more info. Please feel free to volunteer any information that I might need
>to know.
>By helping you I am helping myself.


More information about the Beowulf mailing list