Low latency is where the performance appears to be, gig ethernet, and maybe
10g ethernet have too much latency as you scale
"Richard Maher" <maher_rj@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:d6neb1$rds$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Hi,
>
> I was flicking through the OpenVMS Roadmap presentation yesterday and
came
> across a couple of very interesting (at least to me) milestones
regarding
> Cluster Interconnects. Now, I'm pretty useless with hardware, "the laws
of
> physics capt'n", and not much better as a System Manager so I hope
someone
> can offer me a lay-man's view of what these developments could mean for
VMS
> Cluster performance. (In particular the VMS Lock Manager.)
>
> 1) I saw 10 Gigabit NIC sup****t scheduled for VMS 8.3 (Depending on
which
> slide you look at it says "Integrity Servers Only"). Now 10x what a lot
of
> people are using for a cluster-interconnect at the moment sounds pretty
> ****-hot to me! Especially if you're moving big lock-trees around the
> cluster. Given that this functionality is less than a year away, surely
some
> performance figures or at least anecdotal evidence should be available?
I
> mean, if I was an Rdb engineer that had used piss-poor DLM performance
as
> the rationale for sticking all of my R&D eggs in the stand-alone
single-node
> basket, then I'd be interested in what's happening with this. Right?
"But
> it's not the bandwidth, it's the latency that gets ya." Well that brings
me
> to the next slide. . .
>
> 2) Next Generation Low-Latency Interconnects Post 8.3 (Integrity Servers
> Only)
>
> Am I the only person getting their jollies out of this or what?
>
> I forget when Oracle10g was scheduled to arrive but I'd dearly love to
hear
> from anyone using Cache Fusion and is looking at this!
>
> Will there be a special limit on the distances between nodes for this
stuff
> to work? (Like memory channel) Can you have a Disaster Tolerant Low
Latency
> Cluster?
>
> Regards Richard (Just off to have a cold shower) Maher
>
>
|
