Giganet vs. Myrinet vs. gigabit
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.
Jarrod Smith jsmith at structbio.vanderbilt.eduThu Oct 18 10:28:48 PDT 2001
- Previous message: Giganet vs. Myrinet vs. gigabit
- Next message: Giganet vs. Myrinet vs. gigabit
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
> > Hi all, > > Anyone have experience with these high speed network devices? I'm starting out > with a 32 node cluster doing bioinformatics. The jobs will be high I/O probably > through NFS, thus the need for some high speed connectivity between the nodes. > I'm looking for stability and possibly cross platform use since the NFS server > may have to go to either our large SGI or Sun server. > I've benchmarked Linux NFS3 over myrinet on 64bit/66MHz PCI of the Serverworks HE-SL chipset (running some flavor of the 2.4 kernel). Without any special tweaks to the TCP stack, it maxed out at around 35MB/sec for transfers between a single client and server, 70MB/sec aggregate with two clients connecting to one server, and 100MB/sec aggregate between 3 or more clients and a single server. This is somewhat impressive, but not really real-world performance (for us) because to make sure we were testing the interconnect and not the client/server disks, we had to be sure the data was already buffered on the server, and we wrote it to /dev/null on the clients. Otherwise the performance was between 1/3 to 1/10th this amount. Basically, Myrinet is so fast that you begin exposing the limititions of disk I/O over the SCSI/IDE bus on both the clients and server. In a more real-world situation, the Myrinet would be idling most of the time waiting on disk I/O unless perhaps you had striped RAID on both ends, or lots (10+) clients talking simultaneously to one very-high-performance disk array on the server. And remember that the more simultaneous clients you have connecting, the more random the reads/writes will become so the last point might even be too optimistic. I don't have much experience with truly high-performance disk array I/O. Anyway, Myrinet is nice and fast, but all of a sudden you begin exposing bottlenecks in the system that didn't used to be bottlenecks. In many cases it may be overkill if all you plan to do is use it for NFS. -- Jarrod A. Smith, Ph.D. Asst. Director, Center for Structural Biology Research Asst. Professor, Biochemistry Vanderbilt University On Thu, 18 Oct 2001, farul ghazali wrote: > TIA > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals. > http://personals.yahoo.com > > _______________________________________________ > Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf at beowulf.org > To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf >
- Previous message: Giganet vs. Myrinet vs. gigabit
- Next message: Giganet vs. Myrinet vs. gigabit
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
