[Beowulf] mem consumption strategy for HPC apps?
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.
Toon Knapen toon.knapen at fft.beMon Apr 18 06:16:22 PDT 2005
- Previous message: [Beowulf] mem consumption strategy for HPC apps?
- Next message: [Beowulf] mem consumption strategy for HPC apps?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Robert G. Brown wrote: > On Sun, 17 Apr 2005, Toon Knapen wrote: <snip interesting responses of Mark and Greg> > > These responses are not inconsistent with Mark's or Greg's remarks. Let > me reiterate: > > a) The "best" thing to do is to match your job to your node's > capabilities or vice versa so it runs in core when split up. <snip> > > b) IF your job is TOO BIG to fit in core on the nodes, then there IS > NO "BEST PRACTICE". There is only a choice. Either: <snip> > > Bite the bullet and do all the very hard work required to make your > job run efficiently with whatever hardware you have at the scale you > desire. As you obviously recognize, this is not easy and involves > knowing lots of things about your system. Ultimately it comes down to > partitioning your job so that it runs IN core again, whether it does so > by using the disk directly, by letting the VM subsystem manage the in > core/out of core swapping/paging for you, by splitting the job up across > N nodes (a common enough solution) so that its partitioned pieces fit in > core on each node and relying on IPCs instead of memory reads from disk. > > Really that's it. And in the second of these cases although people may > be able to help you with SPECIFIC issues you encounter, it is pointless > to discuss the "general case" because their ain't no such animal. > Solutions for your problem are likely very different from a solution for > somebody partitioning a lattice which might be different from somebody > partitioning a large volume filled with varying number and position of > particles. An efficient solution is likely going to be expensive and > require learning a lot about the operating system, the various parallel > programming paradigms and available support libraries, the compute, > memory and network hardware, It's true that there is no 'general case' both OTOH all developers of HPC applications may learn a lot of each other. It's a pitty there is little discussion on HPC application and/or library design, which is of course OT for the beowulf list (it's just a general remark), except for a few hot topics (such as beowulf). This is also the reason IIUC that a minisymposium on 'computational infrastructures' (https://compmech.ices.utexas.edu/mslist/mslist.pl?recid=ha328630.119) is organised at the 8th USNCCM conference (http://compmech.ices.utexas.edu/usnccm8.html) for instance and workshops on library design (like http://www.cs.chalmers.se/Cs/Research/Software/dagstuhl/) are organised. > and may require some nonlinear thinking, as > there exist projects such as trapeze to consider (using other nodes' RAM > as a virtual extension of your own, paying the ~5 us latency hit for a > modern network plus a memory access hit, but saving BIG time over a ~ms > scale disk latency hit). > > Anyway, good luck. thanks and thanks for your interesting response. -- Check out our training program on acoustics and register on-line at http://www.fft.be/?id=35
- Previous message: [Beowulf] mem consumption strategy for HPC apps?
- Next message: [Beowulf] mem consumption strategy for HPC apps?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
