[lkml]   [1998]   [Jun]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Remote fork() and Parallel programming
On Mon, 15 Jun 1998, Alan Cox wrote:

> > So are you just giving up on the efficiency issue? It's OK to throw
> > performance away because you are using DSM?
> Which is going to cost more - a clean DSM environment thats easy to get
> things running in or a hard to use but slightly more efficient MPI interface
> (and if we are going to argue efficiency you can stick PVM somewere damp
> and hit the flush).

The SHMEM of some SPH code on a T3E is much faster/efficent than the MPI
implementation. It all basically does depend on the problem to be solved,
the algorithm chosen and on the communication hw. Of course it is easy
to cripple DSM machines bt simply ignoring the fact that not all memory
is local. SCI can help though.

-- martin

// Martin Konold, Herrenbergerstr. 14, 72070 Tuebingen, Germany //
// Email: //
RMSisch ist schlimmer als GNUisch (die fanatisch/religioese
Steigerung von GNUisch, daher ist GNUisch "nur" RMSisch-- ;-)
-- Harald Koenig --

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:43    [W:0.078 / U:4.604 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site