[Beowulf] High Performance SSH/SCP
Many of your questions may have already been answered in earlier discussions or in the FAQ. The search results page will indicate current discussions as well as past list serves, articles, and papers.
Mark Hahn hahn at mcmaster.caThu Feb 14 11:07:36 PST 2008
- Previous message: [Beowulf] High Performance SSH/SCP
- Next message: [Beowulf] High Performance SSH/SCP
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
> Hopefully the PSC folks (or other parties) can convince the OpenSSH > maintainers to allow some options (dynamic buffers, disabled encryption > of the non-handshake payload, etc.) that result in higher-bandwidth > transfers. the switch-to-none feature is a good one. I'm a bit skeptical about the buffering changes, since you can accomplish the same thing with sysctls. (has anyone ever experienced a real case where too-large sysctl net memory settings caused problems? obviously, attempting to do long-fat-pipe transfers to a heavily used web server might be a problem, since the latter wants tight controls on sock mem use.) the really cool thing would be if you could associate a default setting for socket buffers with a _route_. heck, a round-port combo. it seems crazy for apps to be messing with these issues. > ps - For ssh transfers over long distances (high-bandwith and high > latency) one can break the data up into pieces and run multiple > ssh transfers in parallel. Transmitting terabyte data sets from > the West Coast to the East Coast over Abilene I've seen >10X > speedups (that is, >10X the overall throughput) when running > 15--20 simultaneous ssh sessions. this implies inappropriate buffer size settings, no? what's the bw*delay product for that path?
- Previous message: [Beowulf] High Performance SSH/SCP
- Next message: [Beowulf] High Performance SSH/SCP
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
