The FNN (Flat Neighborhood Network) paradox

Georgia Southern Beowulf Cluster Project gscluster at
Fri Feb 23 14:15:28 PST 2001


This is the primary drawback I can think of immediately, however, as you've 
pointed out the method I described is "possible" though it may not be 
significantly useful.  I just wish to know if it is really, really possible 
and if so can it be used to study the software and situation to develop a 
much better solution (faster loading module or a daemon that can monitor for 
this situation).  I'm by far not experienced in these matters, but I think 
the thought has merit.  Happy Hacking to whoever tries this (would, but no 
FNN/AFN cluster to do it with).


>From: Bogdan Costescu <bogdan.costescu at>
>To: Georgia Southern Beowulf Cluster Project <gscluster at>
>CC: Beowulf List <beowulf at>
>Subject: Re: The FNN (Flat Neighborhood Network) paradox
>Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 13:50:30 +0100 (CET)
>On Thu, 22 Feb 2001, Georgia Southern Beowulf Cluster Project wrote:
> > 3. M2 loads the channel-bonding module (all NICS are on different 
> > and sends a reply over the AFN to M1 that it is ready for transmission.
>Loading a module is not an instant operation. You can send lots of normal
>(i.e. on a single link) traffic before the module becomes operational. If
>your software is sensitive to latency (apart from being sensitive to
>bandwidth which is the reason why you would use bonding), you loose.
>But if you're doing something coarse-grained (like image rendering), it
>might fit well.
>Bogdan Costescu
>IWR - Interdisziplinaeres Zentrum fuer Wissenschaftliches Rechnen
>Universitaet Heidelberg, INF 368, D-69120 Heidelberg, GERMANY
>Telephone: +49 6221 54 8869, Telefax: +49 6221 54 8868
>E-mail: Bogdan.Costescu at IWR.Uni-Heidelberg.De

Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at

More information about the Beowulf mailing list