[Beowulf] Shared memory
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.
Kozin, I (Igor) i.kozin at dl.ac.ukMon Jun 27 04:25:13 PDT 2005
- Previous message: [Beowulf] OpenSolaris
- Next message: [Beowulf] Jury rigged ethernet?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
> > But back to the original question: instead of using OpenMP and MPI at > once (which I see in the same way as Mark), I'd suggest to > compile MPICH > with shared memory support and setup the machinefile > accordingly. Then > you can easy look for any speed improvement using shared memory. > > CU - Reuti I think MPI/OpenMP has its niche. Choosing OpenMP or MPI or mixed MPI/OpenMP is also about a choice of appropriate/most suitable algorithm as well. However I must agree that pure MPI seems most suitable if the target architecture is Opteron. BTW, "taskset" worked fine with MPI but could not get a grip on OpenMP threads on a dual core. It is straightforward to make STREAM a mixed OpenMP/MPI code from an MPI source and use it as a test. On the other hand the conclusion of http://www-fp.mcs.anl.gov/petsc-fun3d/Talks/pcfd00.pdf is that mixed MPI/OpenMP model performs well if the job is not memory bandwidth bounded (however this presentation seems to be a bit dated.) Unfortunately I can't recommend a simple established code or benchmark which would allow transparent comparison of MPI versus OpenMP/MPI. Best, Igor
- Previous message: [Beowulf] OpenSolaris
- Next message: [Beowulf] Jury rigged ethernet?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
