The FNN (Flat Neighborhood Network) paradox
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.
Robert G. Brown rgb at phy.duke.eduWed Feb 28 16:28:46 PST 2001
- Previous message: The FNN (Flat Neighborhood Network) paradox
- Next message: The FNN (Flat Neighborhood Network) paradox
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Thu, 22 Feb 2001, Jon Tegner wrote: > We are using an inexpensive D-link switch (DES-3225G), and are using > channel bonding through two VLANS on that (one) switch. Really don't > know what kind of improvement to expect, so I'm attaching two figures, > the first one shows signature graphs (throughput as a function of > time) using mpi and tcp with and without channel bonding (obtained by > netpipe). From this one it looks like channel bonding is working OK. > > But when it comes to my application (simulation of a detonation in gas > phase) improvement is not very spectacular (not worth it?). The figure > shows the same case for three different meshes (480x50 cells to 1920x200 > cells), and displays the speed up as a function of number of nodes. > Obviously I couldn't expect better scaling for the large case, but for > the medium and the small one, are they showing the kind of improvement > one could expect? Or is it likely that something is wrong with our > set-up? > > Thanks in advance for any comments, Questions: a) Do you know if your application is CPU bound or network bound?
- Previous message: The FNN (Flat Neighborhood Network) paradox
- Next message: The FNN (Flat Neighborhood Network) paradox
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
