Hi Joe,

Thanks for the details, it is always good to have feedback from users (your
anecdote is actually very good!).
About the Intel compiler, i know that OSCAR developers had in the past
discussions with Intel about the possibility to create an OSCAR package for it,
but it was before i became active in the project and therefore i do not really
know if they come up with a plan (DongInn, do you remember something about
that?).
But now that the OSCAR status is much more clear for me, i can imagine to work
on that issue at some points, especially since i am interested in using more the
Intel compiler.


Selon "Greenseid, Joseph M." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> Hi Geoffroy,
>
> To answer your question, yes, many of my users do some use some specific
> compiler options beyond the defaults for optimization.  I have a counterpart
> in my group here who is extremely strong on the applications side, and he
> works with our users to optimize the performance of their code -- his usual
> first step is to try to optimize the compile to see how much performance he
> can get out of it before going back to muck with the application itself.
>
> I don't think we here have any numbers on performance gain of Intel over GCC;
> most of our users have a history of using the Intel compiler because at some
> point in the past, it was (much?) better than GCC for them.  I can give one
> anecdote, which may be more amusing than useful.  We had a user who had a
> bioinformatics type code that was built in Python with C extensions.  When my
> friend went to help him try to get some better performance, he wanted to
> recompile with the Intel compiler instead of GCC.  However, Python will use
> the compiler that it was built with, so he had to build Python from source
> with the Intel compiler before he could get it to use the Intel compiler for
> the extensions.  After all that, it did run twice as fast with nothing more
> than the SSE enabled Intel compiler.  As a data point, it's not real helpful,
> but it was a good speed-up, after a crazy amount of effort.  :)
>
> I haven't been following GCC very much, since everyone we work with just
> likes to use the Intel compiler.  I'll have to go check out their
> auto-vectorization plans to see what's up.  Thanks for that tip, btw.
>
> I agree that Intel licensing is a problem.  Unfortunately, not all users are
> going to be non-commercial, so assuming that and hacking in the
> download/inclusion of the free non-commercial version might not be the safest
> idea.  I honestly don't know how to get around this in a generic case beyond
> the possibility of doing the 30 day evaluation version and forcing the user
> to go out and get a long term license on their own afterwards.  All the
> licensing stuff gets very sticky.
>
> I agree that a better first step might be figuring out how to offer Intel
> compilers/tools, rather than offering Intel optimized packages.  If OSCAR can
> figure out how to integrate offering Intel tools (compilers, libs like CMKL,
> tools MPI, etc?), then offering tools built with the Intel offerings (OFED)
> would likely be a lot easier.
>
> --Joe
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wed 3/26/2008 10:13 AM
> To: [email protected]; Greenseid, Joseph M.
> Subject: Re: [Oscar-devel] OFED
>
>
>
> Hi Joe,
>
> Thanks for the details, it is actually very interesting to have some return
> of
> experience. However, my question was actually very unclear (my bad), I was
> actually looking for more details about the performance gain (10% in average
> for
> MPI applications?).
> I also know that if you start to play with the compiling options you can
> improve
> the global performance of your app (both with gcc and the Intel compiler). I
> am
> just curious, are your users only using the default compiling options? or do
> they try to tune the compiling procedure for each compiler?
> I also wonder if the latest version of GCC will improve performance compared
> to
> the Intel compiler; it is supposed to include some auto-vectorization
> mechanism). But that's another story, i digress here. :-)
>
> On the OSCAR side, the problem with the Intel compiler is the license: we
> cannot
> install automatically the Intel compiler without asking the user to agree
> with
> Intel licensing stuff, and clearly, currently the only solution to do so is
> via
> a hack (we do not have a well-defined method for that).
> To summarize, my concern is the following: why should we ship OFED compiled
> with
> the Intel compiler if you do not have a good support of the Intel compiler by
> default. My feeling is the usage of the Intel compiler will really be a plus
> if
> we can also compile the application. In other term, it seems to me that
> instead
> of working on a OFED OPKG compiled with the Intel compiler we should be
> better
> off working on a OPKG for the Intel compiler.
> Do you agree with that?
>
>
> Selon "Greenseid, Joseph M." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > My users find that using the Intel compilers do increase application
> > performance for them over GCC (especially with x86_64 architecture, because
> > of the auto-vectorization you can get with the SSE aware compilers).
> >
> > Given the choice, none of the folks using my system choose GCC over Intel
> > (currently, all my users use Intel compilers and Intel flavors of MPI, even
> > though GCC is also available).
> >
> > I would say that the ability to use the Intel compilers with MPI would be
> > valuable, if OFED is would be considered in OSCAR.  If Intel flavors aren't
> > included, I would probably have to choose to not install it via OSCAR, but
> > instead do it myself by hand to get them.
> >
> > Just the thoughts of one user...
> >
> > --Joe
> >
> > ________________________________
> >
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Tue 3/25/2008 12:03 AM
> > To: [email protected]; Paul Greidanus
> > Subject: Re: [Oscar-devel] OFED
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Just another idea: instead of focusing on the support of multiple compiler
> > (does
> > it really improve the global performance for all applications?), why not
> > working
> > on the virtualization stuff that are today included in OFED (Panda team
> work
> > typically), i.e., VMM-bypass and efficient VM migration?
> >
> > That's should be fun to do and it fits perfectly the OSCAR-V extension
> > (which, i
> > hope, will be very soon integrated directly into OSCAR).
> >
> > My 2 cents,
> >
> > Selon Paul Greidanus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >
> > > Hi All,
> > >
> > > I was just looking and thinking about OFED, and how to package it into
> > > OSCAR, and I'm thinking it might be possible to just copy the SRPMS in,
> > > and have the oscar build scripts build the RPMS, like the rest of
> > > oscar?  Also, we could use an Intel/pgi compiler to build the RPMS
> > > pretty easily as well, and have the option of installing optimized
> > > libraries, rather then just GCC..
> > >
> > > Or do I not know what I'm talking about..
> > >
> > > Paul
> > >
> > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
> > > Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
> > > http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Oscar-devel mailing list
> > > [email protected]
> > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oscar-devel
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
> > Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
> > http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
> > _______________________________________________
> > Oscar-devel mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oscar-devel
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>



-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace
_______________________________________________
Oscar-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oscar-devel

Reply via email to