LAM/MPI General User's Mailing List Archives

From: Phil Ehrens (pehrens_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-06-19 12:46:51

• Next message: Andrey Slepuhin: "Re: LAM: Lam & Opteron"
• Previous message: Jeff Squyres: "Re: LAM: Lam & Opteron"
• In reply to: Jeff Squyres: "Re: LAM: Lam & Opteron"
• Next in thread: Andrey Slepuhin: "Re: LAM: Lam & Opteron"

In any case, here is the channel bonding patch for Linux 2.4.X:

http://sourceforge.net/projects/bonding/

Jeff Squyres wrote:
>
> Have you considered channel bonding? I don't know what the current
> state-of-the-art is with regards to channel bonding. I've never tried it
> myself -- I've heard both success and failure stories about it. There's
> two factors here -- latency and bandwidth.
>

• Next message: Andrey Slepuhin: "Re: LAM: Lam & Opteron"
• Previous message: Jeff Squyres: "Re: LAM: Lam & Opteron"
• In reply to: Jeff Squyres: "Re: LAM: Lam & Opteron"
• Next in thread: Andrey Slepuhin: "Re: LAM: Lam & Opteron"