News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Tesla's TTPoE at Hot Chips 2024: Replacing TCP for Low Latency Applications. Parent comment

Re:Tesla's TTPoE at Hot Chips 2024: Replacing TCP for Low La... by charleshn on Wednesday August 28, 2024 @02:13AM (#41376483)
Indeed, it seems that 80usec is just given as an upper bound based on the 1MB buffer at 100Gbps.

It is definitely possible to go much lower than 80usec on Ethernet. But obviously it depends on the scale, utilisation etc.

At the sizes of GPU clusters we're talking about these days - 32K and up - things get tricky.

The main alternative to Infiniband used in the industry is RoCE - Meta has written a lot about it [0].

There's several reasons to avoid Infiniband, such as cost, availability, vendor lock in, lack of experience etc.

Those are some of the reasons why many players are trying hard to make Ethernet work, see Ultra Ethernet [1].

[0] https://engineering.fb.com/2024/08/05/data-center-engineerin...

[1] https://ultraethernet.org/

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Tesla's TTPoE at Hot Chips 2024: Replacing TCP for Low La... by foobiekr on Wednesday August 28, 2024 @02:32AM (#41376596)
It’s not even rare for Ethernet to be 1.5usec or less latency per switch. 80usec would be impossible to sell in any compute cluster.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Tesla's TTPoE at Hot Chips 2024: Replacing TCP for Low La... by throw0101d on Wednesday August 28, 2024 @11:51AM (#41380867)
> It’s not even rare for Ethernet to be 1.5usec or less latency per switch.

IIRC, Arista started off focusing on the financial market with low latency.

There's fairly well regarded in a general sense nowadays (at least /r/networking often has folks recommending them as a vendor).

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Tesla's TTPoE at Hot Chips 2024: Replacing TCP for Low La... by KaiserPro on Wednesday August 28, 2024 @05:52AM (#41377787)
RoCE is close enough, I think is how meta justifies it.
[ Parent | on HN ]