A number of these seem rather odd, or unrelated to performance.
Walid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It is lame, however i managed to get the following kernel paramter to scale
> well in terms of both performance per node, and scalability over a high
> bandwidth low latency network
>
> net.ipv4.t
On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 04:03:49PM -0400, Prentice Bisbal wrote:
> Lombard, David N wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 09, 2008 at 11:41:29AM -0400, Prentice Bisbal wrote:
> >> I would like to impose some CPU and memory limits on users that are hard
> >> limits that can't be changed/overridden by the users. Wh
Lombard, David N wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 09, 2008 at 11:41:29AM -0400, Prentice Bisbal wrote:
>> I would like to impose some CPU and memory limits on users that are hard
>> limits that can't be changed/overridden by the users. What is the best
>> way to do this? All I know is environment variables or
Dear All,
It is lame, however i managed to get the following kernel paramter to scale
well in terms of both performance per node, and scalability over a high
bandwidth low latency network
net.ipv4.tcp_workaround_signed_windows = 1
net.ipv4.tcp_congestion_control = vegas
net.ipv4.tcp_tso_win_di
Hi Don,
Don Holmgren wrote:
latency difference here matters to many codes). Perhaps of more
significance, though, is that you can use oversubscription to lower the
cost of your fabric. Instead of connecting 12 ports of a leaf switch to
nodes and using the other 12 ports as uplinks, you might
On Fri, 13 Jun 2008, Ramiro Alba Queipo wrote:
On Thu, 2008-06-12 at 10:08 -0500, Don Holmgren wrote:
Ramiro -
You might want to also consider buying just a single 24-port switch for your 22
nodes, and then when you expand either replace with a larger switch, or build a
distributed switch fab
Hallo Ramiro,
Freitag, 13. Juni 2008, meintest Du:
RAQ> On Fri, 2008-06-13 at 17:55 +0200, Jan Heichler wrote:
>> You can use the 24-port switches to create a full bisectional
>> bandwidth network if you want that. Since all the big switches are
>> based on the 24-port silicon this is no problem
2008/6/13 Jason Clinton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> We've seen fairly erratic behavior induced by newer drivers for NVidia
> NForce-based NIC's with forcedeth. If that's your source NIC in the above
> scenario, that could be the source of the issue as congestion timing has
> probably changed. Have yo
On Fri, 2008-06-13 at 17:55 +0200, Jan Heichler wrote:
> Hallo Ramiro,
>
>
> RAQ> The alternatives are:
>
>
> RAQ> a) Start with a good 24 port swith and grow up loosing latency
> and
>
> RAQ> bandwidth
>
>
> You can use the 24-port switches to create a full bisectional
> bandwidth network
Hallo Ramiro,
Freitag, 13. Juni 2008, meintest Du:
RAQ> By the way:
RAQ> a) How many hops a Flextronics 10U 144 Port Modular is doing?
3
RAQ> b) And the others?
3 too.
RAQ> c) How much latency am I loosing in each hop? (In the case of Voltaire
RAQ> switches: ISR 9024 - 24 Ports: 140 ns ; IS
Perhaps this will help:
http://www.lanl.gov/roadrunner/
And:
http://www.lanl.gov/orgs/hpc/roadrunner/pdfs/Koch%20-%20Roadrunner%20Overvie
w/RR%20Seminar%20-%20System%20Overview.pdf
Pages 20 - 29
IANS, the triblade is really a quadblade, blade 1 is the Opteron Blade,
blade 2 is a bridge, blades
On Thu, 2008-06-12 at 10:08 -0500, Don Holmgren wrote:
> Ramiro -
>
> You might want to also consider buying just a single 24-port switch for your
> 22
> nodes, and then when you expand either replace with a larger switch, or build
> a
> distributed switch fabric with a number of leaf switches
On Thu, 2008-06-12 at 10:36 -0400, Joe Landman wrote:
> Ramiro Alba Queipo wrote:
> > Hello everybody:
> >
> > We are about to build an HPC cluster with infiniband network starting
> > from 22 dual socket nodes with AMD QUAD core processors and in a year or
> > so we will be having about 120 nodes
Prentice Bisbal wrote:
vm.overcommit? never heard of that before. I'm going to google that now.
vm tuning knobs/dials
/proc/sys/vm/overcommit_memory
/proc/sys/vm/overcommit_ratio
or via sysctl
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ sysctl -a | grep -i overcommit
...
vm.overcommit_memory = 0
vm.overcommit_ra
Mark Hahn wrote:
>>> Unfortunately the kernel implementation of mmap() doesn't check
>>> the maximum memory size (RLIMIT_RSS) or maximum data size (RLIMIT_DATA)
>>> limits which were being set, but only the maximum virtual RAM size
>>> (RLIMIT_AS) - this is documented in the setrlimit(2) man page.
On Fri, 2008-06-13 at 05:11 +0200, Jan Heichler wrote:
> >
>
>
> So you're concerned with the gap
> between the 2.63 us that OSU
> measured and your 3.07 us you
> measured. I wouldn't be too
> concerned.
>
> 1st: i get a value of 2.96 with MVAPICH 1.0.0 - this is exactly the
> value that i fin
16 matches
Mail list logo
