Re: [OMPI devel] open ib btl and xrc

2008-01-20 Thread Gleb Natapov
On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 11:43:03AM -0500, Jeff Squyres wrote:
> I think the main savings is that mellanox hardware works better when  
> fewer qp's are open.  I.e., it's a resource issue on the HCA, not  
> necessarily a savings in posting buffers to the qp.
Interesting. I hear this justification of XRC for the first time. It's
always was about decreasing memory consumption. As far as I know from
the tests we ran here QP cache on Mellanox HCA is small 10-12 QPs, so I
doubt XRC will help here, but maybe there is another threshold after
which performance drops even more.

> 
> But it's quite a complicated issue.  :-)
> 
> Gleb has some reservations about XRC; I'll let him expound on them...
My current "reservations" are not about XRC per se, but about how OFED
became to be a platform for Mellanox to push things to the world without
any serious reviews. I don't really care about 1 things that goes
into OFED without going into the linux kernel first as long as they are
not change/define interfaces. Upcoming OFED 1.3 will include XRC interface
without any feedback from linux kernel developers. What if interface will
have to be changed in order to be included into the linux kernel? Do you
remember why PLPA exists? Because some distribution hurried to include
process affinity before interface was finalized. Same thing are happening
here. But this discussion is not for this list :)

> 
> 
> 
> On Jan 18, 2008, at 1:06 AM, Don Kerr wrote:
> 
> > Those pointers were perfect thanks.
> >
> > It easy to see the benefit of fewer qps (per node instead of per peer)
> > and less consumption of resources the better but I am curious about  
> > the
> > actual percentage of memory footprint decrease. I am thinking that the
> > largest portion of the footprint comes from the fragments. Do you have
> > any numbers showing the actual memory footprint savings when using  
> > xrc?
> > Just to be clear, I am not asking for you or anyone else to generate
> > these numbers, but if you had them already I would be curious to know
> > the over all savings.
> >
> > -DON
> >
> > Pavel Shamis (Pasha) wrote:
> >> Here is paper from openib http://www.openib.org/archives/nov2007sc/XRC.pdf
> >> and here is mvapich presentation
> >> http://mvapich.cse.ohio-state.edu/publications/ofa_nov07-mvapich-xrc.pdf
> >>
> >> Button line: XRC decrease number of QPs that ompi opens and as result
> >> decrease ompi's memory footprint.
> >> In the openib paper you may see more details about XRC. If you need  
> >> more
> >> details about XRC implemention
> >> in openib blt , please let me know.
> >>
> >>
> >> Instead
> >> Don Kerr wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> After searching, about the only thing I can find on xrc is what it
> >>> stands for, can someone explain the benefits of open mpi's use of  
> >>> xrc,
> >>> maybe point me to a paper, or both?
> >>>
> >>> TIA
> >>> -DON
> >>>
> >>> ___
> >>> devel mailing list
> >>> de...@open-mpi.org
> >>> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> > ___
> > devel mailing list
> > de...@open-mpi.org
> > http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
> 
> 
> -- 
> Jeff Squyres
> Cisco Systems
> 
> ___
> devel mailing list
> de...@open-mpi.org
> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel

--
Gleb.


Re: [OMPI devel] open ib btl and xrc

2008-01-20 Thread Pavel Shamis (Pasha)


It easy to see the benefit of fewer qps (per node instead of per peer) 
and less consumption of resources the better but I am curious about 
the actual percentage of memory footprint decrease. I am thinking that 
the largest portion of the footprint comes from the fragments.
BTW here is link to another paper 
http://www.cs.sandia.gov/~rbbrigh/papers/ompi-ib-pvmmpi07.pdf

that talks about more efficient usage of receive buffers.
Do you have any numbers showing the actual memory footprint savings 
when using xrc?

I don't have.

Pasha.


-DON

Pavel Shamis (Pasha) wrote:
Here is paper from openib 
http://www.openib.org/archives/nov2007sc/XRC.pdf
and here is mvapich presentation 
http://mvapich.cse.ohio-state.edu/publications/ofa_nov07-mvapich-xrc.pdf


Button line: XRC decrease number of QPs that ompi opens and as result 
decrease ompi's memory footprint.
In the openib paper you may see more details about XRC. If you need 
more details about XRC implemention

in openib blt , please let me know.


Instead Don Kerr wrote:
 

Hi,

After searching, about the only thing I can find on xrc is what it 
stands for, can someone explain the benefits of open mpi's use of 
xrc, maybe point me to a paper, or both?


TIA
-DON

___
devel mailing list
de...@open-mpi.org
http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel

  



  





--
Pavel Shamis (Pasha)
Mellanox Technologies



Re: [OMPI devel] open ib btl and xrc

2008-01-18 Thread Jeff Squyres
I think the main savings is that mellanox hardware works better when  
fewer qp's are open.  I.e., it's a resource issue on the HCA, not  
necessarily a savings in posting buffers to the qp.


But it's quite a complicated issue.  :-)

Gleb has some reservations about XRC; I'll let him expound on them...



On Jan 18, 2008, at 1:06 AM, Don Kerr wrote:


Those pointers were perfect thanks.

It easy to see the benefit of fewer qps (per node instead of per peer)
and less consumption of resources the better but I am curious about  
the

actual percentage of memory footprint decrease. I am thinking that the
largest portion of the footprint comes from the fragments. Do you have
any numbers showing the actual memory footprint savings when using  
xrc?

Just to be clear, I am not asking for you or anyone else to generate
these numbers, but if you had them already I would be curious to know
the over all savings.

-DON

Pavel Shamis (Pasha) wrote:

Here is paper from openib http://www.openib.org/archives/nov2007sc/XRC.pdf
and here is mvapich presentation
http://mvapich.cse.ohio-state.edu/publications/ofa_nov07-mvapich-xrc.pdf

Button line: XRC decrease number of QPs that ompi opens and as result
decrease ompi's memory footprint.
In the openib paper you may see more details about XRC. If you need  
more

details about XRC implemention
in openib blt , please let me know.


Instead
Don Kerr wrote:


Hi,

After searching, about the only thing I can find on xrc is what it
stands for, can someone explain the benefits of open mpi's use of  
xrc,

maybe point me to a paper, or both?

TIA
-DON

___
devel mailing list
de...@open-mpi.org
http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel








___
devel mailing list
de...@open-mpi.org
http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel



--
Jeff Squyres
Cisco Systems



Re: [OMPI devel] open ib btl and xrc

2008-01-18 Thread Don Kerr

Those pointers were perfect thanks.

It easy to see the benefit of fewer qps (per node instead of per peer) 
and less consumption of resources the better but I am curious about the 
actual percentage of memory footprint decrease. I am thinking that the 
largest portion of the footprint comes from the fragments. Do you have 
any numbers showing the actual memory footprint savings when using xrc? 
Just to be clear, I am not asking for you or anyone else to generate 
these numbers, but if you had them already I would be curious to know 
the over all savings.


-DON

Pavel Shamis (Pasha) wrote:

Here is paper from openib http://www.openib.org/archives/nov2007sc/XRC.pdf
and here is mvapich presentation 
http://mvapich.cse.ohio-state.edu/publications/ofa_nov07-mvapich-xrc.pdf


Button line: XRC decrease number of QPs that ompi opens and as result 
decrease ompi's memory footprint.
In the openib paper you may see more details about XRC. If you need more 
details about XRC implemention

in openib blt , please let me know.


Instead 
Don Kerr wrote:
  

Hi,

After searching, about the only thing I can find on xrc is what it 
stands for, can someone explain the benefits of open mpi's use of xrc, 
maybe point me to a paper, or both?


TIA
-DON

___
devel mailing list
de...@open-mpi.org
http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel

  




  


Re: [OMPI devel] open ib btl and xrc

2008-01-17 Thread Pavel Shamis (Pasha)

Here is paper from openib http://www.openib.org/archives/nov2007sc/XRC.pdf
and here is mvapich presentation 
http://mvapich.cse.ohio-state.edu/publications/ofa_nov07-mvapich-xrc.pdf


Button line: XRC decrease number of QPs that ompi opens and as result 
decrease ompi's memory footprint.
In the openib paper you may see more details about XRC. If you need more 
details about XRC implemention

in openib blt , please let me know.


Instead 
Don Kerr wrote:

Hi,

After searching, about the only thing I can find on xrc is what it 
stands for, can someone explain the benefits of open mpi's use of xrc, 
maybe point me to a paper, or both?


TIA
-DON

___
devel mailing list
de...@open-mpi.org
http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel

  



--
Pavel Shamis (Pasha)
Mellanox Technologies



[OMPI devel] open ib btl and xrc

2008-01-17 Thread Don Kerr

Hi,

After searching, about the only thing I can find on xrc is what it 
stands for, can someone explain the benefits of open mpi's use of xrc, 
maybe point me to a paper, or both?


TIA
-DON