[Beowulf] Q: IB message rate & large core counts (per node)?
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.
Greg Lindahl lindahl at pbm.comTue Feb 23 13:29:04 PST 2010
- Previous message: [Beowulf] Q: IB message rate & large core counts (per node)?
- Next message: [Beowulf] Q: IB message rate & large core counts (per node)?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 02:36:34PM -0800, Gilad Shainer wrote: > Nice to hear from you Greg, hope all is well. I hope all is well with you, Gilad. From what I can tell, you're again visiting that alternate Universe that you sometimes visit -- is it nice there? > I don't forget anything, at least for now. OSU has different benchmarks > so you can measure message coalescing or real message rate. Funny to > read that Q hated coalescing when they created the first benchmark for > that The benchmark that we created is not a coalescing benchmark. Coalescing produces a meaningless answer from the message rate benchmark. Real apps don't get much of a benefit from message coalescing, but (if they send smallish messages) they get a big benefit from a good non-coalesced message rate. If you look back in the archives of this list, you can find me saying that. And some other people were involved in the discussion, too. Or, we can take your word for what happened, instead of looking at history. I know which method you prefer. -- greg
- Previous message: [Beowulf] Q: IB message rate & large core counts (per node)?
- Next message: [Beowulf] Q: IB message rate & large core counts (per node)?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
