[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.
Brice Goglin brice.goglin at gmail.comTue Feb 23 15:16:39 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 ]
Greg Lindahl wrote: >> now that I'm inventorying ignorance, I don't really understand why RDMA >> always seems to be presented as a big hardware issue. wouldn't it be >> pretty easy to define an eth or IP-level protocol to do remote puts, >> gets, even test-and-set or reduce primitives, where the interrupt handler >> could twiddle registered blobs of user memory on the target side? >> > > That approach is called Active Messages, and can be bolted on to > pretty much every messaging implementation. Doesn't OpenMX provide > that kind of interface? > Open-MX offers what MX offers: no explicit RDMA interface, only 2-sided. But something similar to a remote get is used internally for large messages. It wouldn't be hard to mplement some RDMA-like features in such a software-only model like Mark said above. Brice
- 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
