On Sat, Sep 21, 2013 at 11:21:19PM -0500, Jaln wrote: > Hi everyone, > > I'm not sure, whether the lustre or the MPI forum is the right place for my > question.
both, i guess :> > The question is about the ROMIO optimization on Lustre, > In one SC'08 paper, > http://users.eecs.northwestern.edu/~wkliao/PAPERS/fd_sc08_revised.pdf<https://mail.ttu.edu/owa/redir.aspx?C=yUmbVUH4hUWLFEWFA2GcoiKOEhnhitAIatZfGT92-aN2MTXitjDjPgfE9EfJkJF9q3XAaOQ_iME.&URL=http%3a%2f%2fusers.eecs.northwestern.edu%2f%7ewkliao%2fPAPERS%2ffd_sc08_revised.pdf> > , it's said that the way ROMIO assigns the file domains to I/O aggregators > will not make two aggregators access the same OST. > > In my understanding, this means, the data locality on Lustre layer has been > taken care of in the ROMIO, such that the aggregators will not > have competition on the same OST. > > My question is "is this optimization used in all current lustre system, > e.g., Hopper at NERSC?" Wei-keng never contributed the specific ROMIO optimizations he discussed in the SC 08 paper, but his work did spur a lot of community discussion and contributions. Emoly Lu contributed a bunch of Lustre ADIO driver work, which Pascal Deveze and Martin Pokorny improved upon. MPICH-1.3 and newer contain these improvements. David Knaak from Cray implemented his own improvements. Cray's MPI-IO is based on ROMIO but the cray modifications are proprietary. MPT-3.2 and newer contain lustre-specific optimizations. The community has been quiet with respect to Lustre MPI-IO work since then. I hope that's because everything "just works". ==rob -- Rob Latham Mathematics and Computer Science Division Argonne National Lab, IL USA _______________________________________________ Lustre-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss
