merci.
On 03/08/2013 04:28 PM, Nick Papior Andersen wrote:
Dear Federico,
For your transiesta runs, you will probably quickly come to
shortcomings. The parallelization scheme, for now, is not really
scalable for huge systems, nor excessive number of processors.
As transiesta is only parallelized across energy points you will
immediately see your system stall for number of processors > NE. So
dont do that. :)
Kind regards Nick
2013/3/8 Federico Iori <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
Thanks Bartek.
The point is exactly to know about a blugene for me, since there
the code should scale on thousand of cpus instead. We have access
only to this kind of machine basically so the idea is trying to
move in this new direction.
In naycase I will keep the informations you gave!
ciao!
ff
On 03/08/2013 04:08 PM, Bartek Szyja wrote:
Hi Federico,
I have been using SIESTA on huygens in Amsterdam, which is
also IBM
machine, but it's running linux (I don't know what OS is
installed on
Fermi) and has POWER6 CPUs. It depends on the model, but
generally the
calculations scale reasonably well up to 4 nodes (128 CPUs).
There is no
significant speedup from using SMT. I also haven't done any
tests with
k-points however nor order-N - the scaling might be better.
Cheers,
Bartek
On Fri, 2013-03-08 at 15:14 +0100, Federico Iori wrote:
Hi Siesta people!
I am wondering if some of you has ever did some scaling
test of Siesta
and Transiesta on Fermi, the IBM-BlueGene /Q installed in
Cineca in
Bologna. I was considering the idea to run on that machine
but I would
like to know if the code is really able to scale on this
kind of machine.
Do you have any idea?
Thanks a lot
Federico Iori.
