Hi John,

Do you know which version of MPT you are running? NERSC received an
updated version a few months back that fixed some problems with kernel
I/O buffering for >4 threads on the XE6. You may want to double check
that you have that update. 150MB/s is pretty bad. How many OSTs do you
have and are you striping over all of them?

Mark

On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 3:42 PM, Biddiscombe, John A. <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Have you tried using the MPI-POSIX VFD for independent access?
>
>>Thanks  - I'll report back with further findings
>
> Rubbish! I still only get 150MB/s with the mpiposix driver.
>
> As Queen Victoria would have said "we are not amused"
>
> I suspect I've got an error somewhere because something should have changed.
>
> JB
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] 
> On Behalf Of Mark Howison
> Sent: 05 April 2011 17:19
> To: HDF Users Discussion List
> Subject: Re: [Hdf-forum] Chunking : was Howison et al Lustre mdc_config
>
> Hi John,
>
> What platform and parallel file system is this on? Have you tried
> using the MPI-POSIX VFD for independent access?
>
> Thanks,
> Mark
>
> On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 11:16 AM, Biddiscombe, John A. <[email protected]> 
> wrote:
>> Elena,
>>
>> I was just replying to myself when your email came in.
>> I knocked up a quick wrapper to enable testing of the cache eviction stuff 
>> so I'm happy (ish).
>>
>> However : I'm seeing puzzling behaviour with chunking.
>> Using collective IO, (tweaking various params) I see transfer rates from 
>> 1GB/s to 3GB/s depending on stripe size, number of cb_nodes, etc.
>>
>> However, when using chunking with independent IO, I set stripe size to 6MB, 
>> chunk dims to match the 6MB, each node is writing 6MB, alignment is set to 
>> 6MB intervals and I've followed all the tips I can find. I see (for 512 
>> nodes writing 6MB each = 4GB total) a max throughput of around 150MB/s.
>>
>> This is shockingly slow compared to collective IO and I'm quite surprised. 
>> I've been playing with this for a few days now and my general impression is 
>> that
>> chunking = rubbish
>> collective = nice
>>
>> I did not expect chunking to be so bad compared to collective (which is a 
>> shame as I was hoping to use it for compression etc).
>>
>> Can anyone suggest further tweaks that  I should be looking out for to 
>> change. (one thing for example that seems to make no difference is the 
>> H5Pset_istore_k(fcpl, btree_ik); stuff. I still don't quite know what the 
>> correct value for btree_ik is. Ive read the man page, but I'm puzzled as to 
>> the correct meaning. if I know there will be 512 chunks, what is the 'right' 
>> value of btree_ik?
>>
>> Any clues gratefully received for optimizing chunking. I hoped the thread 
>> about 30,000 processes would carry on as I found it interesting to follow.
>>
>> ttfn
>>
>> JB
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] 
>> On Behalf Of Elena Pourmal
>> Sent: 05 April 2011 17:01
>> To: HDF Users Discussion List
>> Subject: Re: [Hdf-forum] Question re: Howison et al Lustre mdc_config tuning 
>> recommendations
>>
>> Hi John,
>> On Apr 5, 2011, at 4:21 AM, Biddiscombe, John A. wrote:
>>
>>>>>>  H5AC_cache_config_t mdc_config;
>>>>>>  hid_t file_id;
>>>>>>  file_id = H5Fopen("file.h5", H5ACC_RDWR, H5P_DEFAULT);
>>>>>>  mdc_config.version = H5AC__CURR_CACHE_CONFIG_VERSION;
>>>>>>  H5Pget_mdc_config(file_id, &mdc_config)
>>>>>>  mdc_config.evictions_enabled = 0 /* FALSE */;
>>>>>>  mdc_config.incr_mode = H5C_incr__off;
>>>>>>  mdc_config.decr_mode = H5C_decr__off;
>>>>>>  H5Pset_mdc_config(file_id, &mdc_config);
>>>
>>> I couldn't find fortran bindings for these. Do they exist in any recent 
>>> releases or svn branches.
>>>
>> Fortran wrappers for do not exist. Please let us know which Fortran wrappers 
>> do you need and we will add them to our to-do list.
>>
>> Elena
>>> thanks
>>>
>>> JB
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Hdf-forum is for HDF software users discussion.
>>> [email protected]
>>> http://mail.hdfgroup.org/mailman/listinfo/hdf-forum_hdfgroup.org
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Hdf-forum is for HDF software users discussion.
>> [email protected]
>> http://mail.hdfgroup.org/mailman/listinfo/hdf-forum_hdfgroup.org
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Hdf-forum is for HDF software users discussion.
>> [email protected]
>> http://mail.hdfgroup.org/mailman/listinfo/hdf-forum_hdfgroup.org
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Hdf-forum is for HDF software users discussion.
> [email protected]
> http://mail.hdfgroup.org/mailman/listinfo/hdf-forum_hdfgroup.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> Hdf-forum is for HDF software users discussion.
> [email protected]
> http://mail.hdfgroup.org/mailman/listinfo/hdf-forum_hdfgroup.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> Hdf-forum is for HDF software users discussion.
> [email protected]
> http://mail.hdfgroup.org/mailman/listinfo/hdf-forum_hdfgroup.org
>

_______________________________________________
Hdf-forum is for HDF software users discussion.
[email protected]
http://mail.hdfgroup.org/mailman/listinfo/hdf-forum_hdfgroup.org

Reply via email to