[Beowulf] multi-threading vs. MPI
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.
Joe Landman landman at scalableinformatics.comTue Dec 11 07:40:57 PST 2007
- Previous message: [Beowulf] multi-threading vs. MPI
- Next message: [Beowulf] multi-threading vs. MPI
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Geoff Jacobs wrote: > Please note that we are all speaking as developers on clusters. Although > this is a valuable niche in the market, it is still only a niche. Even > with workstations, systems still only come with a few cores. In this > regime, threads are still relevant from a performance standpoint. > Furthermore, threads (of whichever flavor) are a first class API in most > operating systems. Until Joe Sixpack can buy Windows ZX (or whatever) > with the new message passing system preloaded, the old system which is > preinstalled will still be the development target of most ISVs. This historical inertia is a killer. I have heard that lots of windows ISVs had balked at doing 64 bit CCS ports due to the fact that their code already ran on windows. This is one of the problems SGI faced with 32 bit code during the 32->64 bit transition. Many users of AMD Opterons in 2004-2005 were completely unaware of any performance advantage they got, effectively for free, by recompiling their code for 64 bit vs 32 bit. We still have many customers happily using 32 bit software (pre-compiled) on 64 bit hardware and OSes, as it is a path of least resistance. With OpenMP now part of gcc (as of 4.2, and there should be a nice little article about using this coming out soon ... cough cough) I would expect to see a great deal more interest in using it for multi-core programming from people with serial codes or codes that could potentially take advantage of multiple threads. Large cluster programming will always need an MPI or MPI-like system. Small SMP programming might have easier to use alternatives that are "good enough". That "good enough" factor is not one to be discounted lightly, you do so at your own peril. -- Joseph Landman, Ph.D Founder and CEO Scalable Informatics LLC, email: landman at scalableinformatics.com web : http://www.scalableinformatics.com http://jackrabbit.scalableinformatics.com phone: +1 734 786 8423 fax : +1 866 888 3112 cell : +1 734 612 4615
- Previous message: [Beowulf] multi-threading vs. MPI
- Next message: [Beowulf] multi-threading vs. MPI
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
