Archives


- Beowulf
- Beowulf Announce
- Scyld-users
- Beowulf on Debian

HZ and HPC

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.

Search

Ken Chase math at velocet.ca
Wed Jan 29 06:10:16 PST 2003


On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 08:55:11AM -0500, Ken Chase's contradicting
himself again with...

> With large caches today you can tune a class of jobs for your cluster
> that are below the threshhold size nicely, and run those jobs differently
> from the others (using different #s of nodes, possibly even different
> interconnects as thrashing will obviously destroy scaling).

Actually, now that I think of this, it may well do the opposite in fact 
if you have a job that runs slower for some reason, the relative speed
of your network is now faster for that job - it may well allow you to
maintain scaling with slower interconnects between nodes. Most likely
you may be able to scale the same amount over a few more nodes than
with the job running faster on the CPU.

(Consider the pathological condition - if a job ran 100 times faster on
a CPU when not thrashing the cache, you'd need a much faster interconnect
(much lower latency) to get the messages to the other nodes in time to
avoid having them waiting on data.)

Sometimes I think that really wide pipes that are otherwise cheap and slow
might serve heavily loaded (multiple jobs) CPUs more efficiently. Comments?

/kc
-- 
Ken Chase, math at velocet.ca  *  Velocet Communications Inc.  *  Toronto, CANADA 



More information about the Beowulf mailing list