> There is a nice (non-free) SGI parallelizing FORTRAN compiler which unrolls > loops and I only have 3SGI's here at the moment and they are becoming outdated very quickly. I won't get any new SGI hardware :(
> distributes them across processors, but that's for IRIX and only works well > on shared hmm, loops are the easiest part. I can do it myself quite easily. > memory machines- like their Origin 2000s. That's about as easy as it gets, > but you > need a large SMP box to make it worth while. only one two processor SGI here. not to fast. sparcs are faster. but due to hardware aging new students-labs based on PCs will become faster that any hardware I have here. > separate and may be unrolled, C assumes they happen in series. So for > example, the C there are very funny compilers that allow one to mark parts of code that may be parallellized..(pardon my english) > would generate the Fibonacci series, but if you did it in FORTRAN, a good > optimizing > compiler would not necessarily do the loop sequentially and would probably > give you > garbage. I've seen parallel fibonacci algorithm :) not that I understand it fully ;) > I don't know of anyone using it to do HPC. The trouble is, even with MOSIX, > you have > to write your app in multiple threads/processes, and MOSIX will distribute the > threads/processes over machines, the way Linux SMP distributes them over > processors on > one machine. Still non-trivial. But that's easier to do. and programmers do it all the time due to popular dual-processor bords. > delays. I don't know how MOSIX does this, but it's bound to be slower than > if you use > MPI to control communication yourself. Yes, I assume some there will be problems, I'm just wondering how big they are. regards, Eyck
