[Beowulf] Lowered latency with multi-rail IB?
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.
Mikhail Kuzminsky kus at free.netFri Mar 27 10:58:20 PDT 2009
- Previous message: [Beowulf] Lowered latency with multi-rail IB?
- Next message: [Beowulf] Lowered latency with multi-rail IB?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
In message from Dow Hurst DPHURST <DPHURST at uncg.edu> (Thu, 26 Mar 2009 23:32:23 -0400): >We've got a couple of weeks max to finalize spec'ing a new cluster. >Has >anyone knowledge of lowering latency for NAMD by implementing a >multi-rail IB solution using MVAPICH or Intel's MPI? My research >tells >me low latency is key to scaling our code of choice, NAMD, >effectively. Has anyone cut down real effective latency >to below 1.0us using multi-rail IB for molecular dynamics codes such >Gromacs, Amber, CHARMM, or NAMD? What about lowered latency for >parallel abnitio calculations involving NwChem, Jaguar, or Gaussian >using multi-rail IB? In opposition to molecular dynamics programs (Gromacs/Amber/Charmm) where low latency is necessary, for some quantum chemical programs (Gaussian, Gamess-US) there is relative low interconnect dependency. I measured message lengthes for Gaussian-03 for a set of calculation methods, and this messages are middle-to-large in sizes. NWChem is the only quantum-chemical program I know, which require high interconnect performance. I don't know about Jaguar. Mikhail Kuzminsky Computer Assistance to Chemical Research Center Zelinsky Institute of Organic Chemistry RAS Moscow > > >If so, what was the configuration of cards and software? Any caveats >involved, except price? >;-) > >Multi-rail IB is not something I know much about so am trying to get >up to speed on what is possible and what is not. I do understand >that lowering latency using multi-rail has to come from the MPI layer >knowing how to use the hardware properly and some MPI implementations >have such options and others don't. I understand that MVAPICH has >some capabilities to use multi-rail and that NAMD is run on top of >MVAPICH on many IB based clusters. Any links or pointers to how I >can quickly educate myself on the topic would be appreciated. >Best wishes, > >Dow > >__________________________________ >Dow P. Hurst, Research Scientist >Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry >University of North Carolina at Greensboro >435 New Science Bldg. >Greensboro, NC 27402-6170 >dphurst at uncg.edu >Dow.Hurst at mindspring.com >336-334-5122 office >336-334-4766 lab >336-334-5402 fax >-- >This message has been scanned for viruses and >dangerous content by MailScanner, and is >believed to be clean. >
- Previous message: [Beowulf] Lowered latency with multi-rail IB?
- Next message: [Beowulf] Lowered latency with multi-rail IB?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
