Fwd: Re: [Beowulf] Why is communication so expensive for very small messages?
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.
Jonathan Boyle j.boyle at manchester.ac.ukThu Apr 26 09:43:38 PDT 2007
- Previous message: Fwd: [Beowulf] Re: Why is communication so expensive for very small messages
- Next message: [Beowulf] Diskless Cluster Ram Disk Login
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Thanks for your advice. Pingponging messages back and forth certainly seems to fix the problem, as does inserting an MPI_Barrier(MPI_COMM_WORLD) after every send. What's a window nad ack message and where would I find out more about them? ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- Subject: Re: [Beowulf] Why is communication so expensive for very small messages? Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2007 15:54:42 -0400 From: Patrick Geoffray <patrick at myri.com> To: Jonathan Boyle <j.boyle at manchester.ac.uk> Cc: beowulf at beowulf.org Jonathan Boyle wrote: > For 2 processor blocking calls, mpptest indicates a latency of about 30 > microseconds. > > However when I measure communication times in my own program using a loop > as follows.... If you don't want flow control problems, you need to do a pingpong (each node send and recv alternatively) or do explicit flow control using a window nad ack message. MPI_Send() can return as soon as the data is buffered (ie copied somewhere on the send side), and that is much faster than the network itself, so the somewhere will fill up eventually. Patrick -------------------------------------------------------
- Previous message: Fwd: [Beowulf] Re: Why is communication so expensive for very small messages
- Next message: [Beowulf] Diskless Cluster Ram Disk Login
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
