TCP configuration for dask example #654
Conversation
|
|
||
| .. note:: | ||
|
|
||
| If using TCP without NVLink or Infiniband, TCP alone may require additional configuration |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That's why I think we should try to be less aggressive in trying to solve everyone's problems, "require" is definitely not the right word. It will still work without setting any of that, and we don't know whether limitations may exist when increasing the segment size for TCP depending on hardware, network stability, etc., it has worked for us and improved performance but doesn't mean it will for every case and we don't extensively test for that. Furthermore, there may be a reason for segment sizes to be that small by default, and if I had to guess I would say this has to do with robustness, even for networks that are less stable and more susceptible to packet losses.
With the above said, I don't mind either having this or not, but I think we should balance if we really want to propose solutions we don't really know much about and don't really test for.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What about just saying something like "one may consider"?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That's ok too, I'm just saying that by doing this kind of statement we're implicitly saying that we support those configurations somehow, which isn't really the case.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is it? When we started using UCX, there were a lot of details that were unknown to us and we spent a lot of time figuring things out and writing them down. As I see it, us writing this down is just for the benefit of others so they need not complete the same exercise. IOW we are just giving users guidance and it is up to them to do what they will with it 🙂
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I would agree with that if we really knew what are the potential side-effects of those configurations. But IMO, we know of one and only one case for which it had better performance and I'm not confident in giving advice based on a single observation. With that said, I would personally prefer that users refer to official UCX docs for those, after all, I never observed UCX being faster than Python Sockets when we don't have NVLink or IB available.
Doc update to address changes to UCX_TCP_{TX,RX}_SEG_SIZE defaults
cc @pentschev @jakirkham