From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S268870AbUHLXFB (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Aug 2004 19:05:01 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S268869AbUHLXC0 (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Aug 2004 19:02:26 -0400 Received: from rav-az.mvista.com ([65.200.49.157]:35625 "EHLO zipcode.az.mvista.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S268868AbUHLW7U (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Aug 2004 18:59:20 -0400 Subject: Re: [Linux-cluster] Re: [cgl_discussion] Re: [dcl_discussion] Clustersummit materials From: Steven Dake Reply-To: sdake@mvista.com To: Lars Marowsky-Bree Cc: Chris Wright , Discussion of clustering software components including GFS , dcl_discussion@osdl.org, "Walker, Bruce J" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cgl_discussion@osdl.org In-Reply-To: <20040812203738.GK9722@marowsky-bree.de> References: <3689AF909D816446BA505D21F1461AE4C75110@cacexc04.americas.cpqcorp.net> <1092249962.4717.21.camel@persist.az.mvista.com> <20040812095736.GE4096@marowsky-bree.de> <1092332536.7315.1.camel@persist.az.mvista.com> <20040812203738.GK9722@marowsky-bree.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Organization: MontaVista Software, Inc. Message-Id: <1092351549.7315.5.camel@persist.az.mvista.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.6 Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 15:59:10 -0700 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2004-08-12 at 13:37, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote: > On 2004-08-12T10:42:16, > Steven Dake said: > > > agreed... Transis in kernel would be a fine alternative to openais gmi > > in kernel. > > > > Speaking of transis, is the code posted anywhere? I'd like to have a > > look. > > It's not yet at the final location, but we put up what we got at > http://wiki.trick.ca/linux-ha/Transis . > > Lars Thanks for posting transis. I had a look at the examples and API. The API is of course different then openais and focused on client/server architecture. I tried a performance test by sending a 64k message, and then receiving it 10 times with two nodes. This operation takes about 5 seconds on my hardware which is 128k/sec. I was expecting more like 8-10MB/sec. Is there anything that can be done to improve the performance? Thanks -steve Certainly a different sort of API then openais... > Sincerely, > Lars Marowsky-Brée