This is a very interesting discussion to me.  I have started to purchase 
components for an 8 core microWulf based on the Calvin College microWulf 
constructed by Prof. Joel Adams and his student except I will use slightly 
faster cores with an AMD X2 5400+ in the Master node (dual core) and three AMD 
X2 4000+ dual core processors enclosed in inexpensive boxes.  The Master node 
has an MSI K9N SLI Platinum motherboard which has two Gigabit ports so perhaps 
the initial configuration with three satellite dual core CPU can be extended to 
a second set of boxes later.  All these AM2-socket CPU are dual core and 
apparently Prof. Adams was able to address them in the microWulf as individual 
cores but there is, I believe, some hyperthreading between the dual cores so 
what is the story about how the dual cores can be addressed individually but 
still have hyperthreading between the dual cores?  I am an experienced 
programmer for Von Neuman architecture and a total novice on parallel systems 
but as I build the microWulf I wonder if MPI will decouple the hyperthreading 
or is it not there?  From what little I have learned so far the microWulf 
switch depends on the relatively slow Gigabit Ethernet so there is probably 
time within each dual core CPU for hyperthreading to occur if indeed provision 
is provided for hyperthreading in the AMD X2 dual cores.  Sorry to ask such a 
dumb question but I am trying to learn.
 
Don Shillady
Emeritus PRofessor of Chemistry, VCU
Ashland Va (working at home)


From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Re: [Beowulf] 
multi-threading vs. MPIDate: Fri, 7 Dec 2007 22:15:25 +0000CC: 
 
-------------- Original message -------------- From: "Toon Knapen" <[EMAIL 
PROTECTED]> 
 
How come there is almost unanimous agreement in the beowulf-community while the 
rest is almost unanimous convinced of the opposite ? Are we just tapping 
ourselves on the back or is MP not sufficiently dissiminated or ... ? 
 
Mmm ... I think the answer to this is that the rest of world (non-HPC world) is 
in a time
warp.  HPC went through its SMP-threads phase in the early-mid 1990s with 
OpenMP, and then we needed more a more scalable approach (MPI).  Now that 
multi-core and multi-socket has brought parallelism to the rest of the 
Universe, SMP-based parallelism has had a resurgence ... this has also 
naturally caused some in HPC to revisit the question as nodes have fattened.  
 
The allure of a programming model that is intuitive, expressive, symbolically 
light-weight,
and provides a way to manage the latency variance across memory partitions is 
irresistable.
 
I kind of like the CAF extension to Fortran and the concept of co-arrays.  The 
co-array is
and array of identical normal arrays, but one per active image/process.  They 
are defined as such:
 
          real, dimension (N) [*] ::  X, Y
 
If the program is run on 8 cores/processors/images the * becomes 8.  8, 1D 
arrays of size
N are created on each processor. In any references to the locale component of 
the co-array
(the image on the processor referencing it), you can drop the []s ... all other 
references (remote)
must include it.  This is symbolically light, but reminds the programmer of 
every costly non-
local reference with the presence of the []s in the assignment or operation.  
There is much
more to it than that of course, but as the performance gap between carefully 
constructed
MPI applications and CAF compiled code shrinks I can see the later gaining some 
traction
for purely programming elegance related reasons.  If you accept that notion 
that most MPI
programs are written at a B- level in terms of efficiency then the idea of gap 
closing may not
be so far fetched.  CAF is supposed to be include in the Fortran 2008 standard.
 
rbw
 
-- "Making predictions is hard, especially about the future." Niels Bohr -- 
Richard Walsh Thrashing River Consulting-- 5605 Alameda St. Shoreview, MN 55126 
--Forwarded Message Attachment--From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: 
[Beowulf] multi-threading vs. MPIDate: Fri, 7 Dec 2007 20:07:32 
+0000_______________________________________________Beowulf mailing list, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit 
http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf
_______________________________________________
Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf@beowulf.org
To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit 
http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf

Reply via email to