Myrinet vs. Dolphin
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.
Jared Hodge jared_hodge at iat.utexas.eduFri Jan 26 06:11:24 PST 2001
- Previous message: Myrinet vs. Dolphin
- Next message: Myrinet vs. Dolphin
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
I appreciate everyone's quick responses to my question. As a result, I have become quite a bit more educated in high speed networking. Perhaps I should clarify our problem a little more before there are any more responses. We are currently using the M2M-PCI64A Myrinet equipment, which is not the most current equipment from Myricom. They now have their Myrinet 2000 equipment (a.k.a. M3M-PCI64B) including newer switches which scale better than the older equipment, although I did not know this because they haven't updated their web page in six months. The bad part is that the while the Myrinet 2000 equipment is backward compatible with the older version, they are no longer selling the older equipment, so I'm forced to pay for new, bleeding edge technology when I'll only be getting the performance of the older technology. They have no plan (as far as I know) for migrating current customers off of the bleeding edge to a lower price bracket. They just keep selling newer and better hardware for the same price, which is good if you want to buy a new system, but for upgrading our current cluster, it's not good. Speaking from a pragmatic point of view (I know the scientists among you appreciate that) we bought the most up to date Myrinet equipment at the time because we needed that performance to solve our problems. We were forced onto the bleeding edge by our performance demands. If we had known a year ago that we would still have to pay the same amount for the same performance now, we probably would have chosen a different option. Also, in response to Patrick's response. We were told by Myrinet (specifically David PeGan) that in order to get to 24 nodes we would need to do the following (direct quote from E-mail): "Add two more switches identical to the one you have (M2LM-SW16) Add 16 more adapter cards (M2L-PCI64B-2) Purchase enough LAN cables to bring your total to 24 Purchase enough SAN cables to bring your total to 12 The topology would be as follows: You would use the 8 SAN ports on each switch for the purpose of inter-switch connection. You would connect 4 SAN ports on switch A to 4 on switch B and 4 to switch C. You would then connect the remaining 4 SAN ports between switch B and C. You would then connect 8 nodes to each switch using the LAN ports." That makes 3 16-port switches to get to 24 nodes, or $15,000 worth of switches, in addition to the $26,000 worth of network cards. That is a scalability problem. I hope that no-one else on the list get stuck in this problem, but it's something that you might want to consider if you've got a small cluster and not the very latest Myrinet equipment. I'm hoping Myricom will solve this problem by offering some sort of trade in program or selling their surplus older equipment at a lower price. A trade in program may seem like a foolish option, but there are probably many other groups out there besides mine that would like to migrate off of the bleeding edge of technology, but this could really only be done through Myricom, since we would need some kind of guarantee that we would get the needed performance out of them. Maybe they could have their engineers check them out and approve them as Myricom Certified Used or something like that (sounds like something that would be done with a car, but hey this stuff actually costs more than my car). Are there other people with this problem? Patrick Geoffray wrote: > > Jared Hodge wrote: > > > well. I have several questions though. First, we are considering > > upgrading our cluster with more nodes, and myrinet seems to have a > > scalability problem in the average cluster size area. We have 8 nodes > > Hi, > > There is no scalability problem in the average cluster size area :-) > It's clear that if you have a 16 ports switch, you will have to get a > new one to connect more than 16 nodes. With two 16 nodes switches, you > can connect up to 30 nodes (one link between the switches) but one link > between 2 switches is a very very poor design (bad bissection). You can > then use more than one link and the mapper with balance the coms between > these inter-switch connections. > > The new product (Myrinet 2000 switch M3M) is in production now and will > be added soon on the price list on the web. This new switch is composed > of a rack and slots than contains 8 ports each (8 fibers or 8 Serial or > 8 SAN). You can get a huge rack (9U) and buy only one slot with 8 ports > to connect 8 nodes. When you want to upgrade to 32 nodes, you buy 3 more > slots. You can mix link types (one slot fibers and one slot SAN for > example). > Each slot contains a 16 ports full cross-bar and 8 links are connected > to the backplane in the back of the rack in a Clos network (maximum > bissection). > > Ask Myricom sales people for more information. > > > I can tell. Dolphin's switchless technology appears inviting in this > > Without switches and with 2 ports per card, you have to do a grid, that > means you share links for coms between differents nodes. It may be > enough for regular applications that talk only to the one-step > neighbours. > Some people believe it's scalable, some people don't. I don't. > > Of course, I am biaised in my comments :-) > > Hope it gives more information > > -- > Patrick Geoffray > > --------------------------------------------------------------- > | Myricom Inc | University of Tennessee - CS Dept | > | 325 N Santa Anita Ave. | Suite 203, 1122 Volunteer Blvd. | > | Arcadia, CA 91006 | Knoxville, TN 37996-3450 | > | (626) 821-5555 | Tel/Fax : (865) 974-0482 | > --------------------------------------------------------------- > > _______________________________________________ > Beowulf mailing list > Beowulf at beowulf.org > http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf -- Jared Hodge Institute for Advanced Technology The University of Texas at Austin 3925 W. Braker Lane, Suite 400 Austin, Texas 78759 Phone: 512-232-4460 FAX: 512-471-9096 Email: Jared_Hodge at iat.utexas.edu
- Previous message: Myrinet vs. Dolphin
- Next message: Myrinet vs. Dolphin
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
