[Beowulf] More cores/More processors/More nodes?
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.
Joe Landman landman at scalableinformatics.comFri Nov 10 14:52:48 PST 2006
- Previous message: [Beowulf] More cores/More processors/More nodes?
- Next message: [Beowulf] MPI synchronization problem
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
I must have missed the original message. Chris Samuel wrote: > On Wednesday 04 October 2006 00:37, Douglas Eadline wrote: > >> This is a non-obvious result many find hard to believe. >> That is, MPI on the same node maybe faster than some shared/threaded >> mode. (of course it all depends on the application etc.) > > We believe we have seen that with LS-Dyna comparing SMP versus MPP (MPI) > variants on a single node. Actually (my apologies to Doug for not seeing this before and commenting), the Cray folks have noted this for a number of years, specifically when they moved MPI code from T3D/T3E back onto Vector boxes, it behaved better. The rationale for this is that MPI does in fact impose a very stringent restriction on sharing in that you must explicitly share data. This *forces* you into spatial localization, and to a degree, temporal localization, as you have to get the most out of your data. OpenMP (and please don't beat me up on this: I like the OpenMP syntax/usage model better than MPI) doesn't force you to explicitly share items. The compiler does it for you. If you forget, well, thats ok, it will default to doing the right thing. This also means that you may not work as hard to spatially localize your computation as you would in MPI. MPI requires a more rigid discipline, and if you have ever debugged an MPI program, it also requires lots of antacid. In the age of gui debuggers, I find myself using print statements, and barriers like MPI_Barrier... (yeah I know about Etnus, but I don't have enough need to justify the purchase). I don't have enough experience with PGAS languages to see whether or not they provide the ease of use of OpenMP with the rigid sharing and localization of MPI. I still think Chapel looks neat, would love to play with a compiler for it. I think UPC might even run on some clusters, last I looked you had to compile it remotely (some sort of web page thingy). Joe > > cheers, > Chris > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf at beowulf.org > To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf -- Joseph Landman, Ph.D Founder and CEO Scalable Informatics LLC, email: landman at scalableinformatics.com web : http://www.scalableinformatics.com phone: +1 734 786 8423 fax : +1 734 786 8452 cell : +1 734 612 4615
- Previous message: [Beowulf] More cores/More processors/More nodes?
- Next message: [Beowulf] MPI synchronization problem
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
