On 07/06/11 13:00, Steve Kargl wrote:
On Wed, Jul 06, 2011 at 05:05:41PM +0000, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
In message<20110706170132.ga68...@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>, Steve Kargl w
rites:
I periodically ran the same type test in the 2008 post over the
last three years. Nothing has changed. I even set up an account
on one node in my cluster for jeffr to use. He was too busy to
investigate at that time.
Isn't this just the lemming-syncer hurling every dirty block over
the cliff at the same time ?
I don't know the answer. Of course, having no experience in
processing scheduling, I don't understand the question either ;-)
AFAICT, it is a cpu affinity issue. If I launch n+1 MPI images
on a system with n cpus/cores, then 2 (and sometimes 3) images
are stuck on a cpu and those 2 (or 3) images ping-pong on that
cpu. I recall trying to use renice(8) to force some load
balancing, but vaguely remember that it did not help.
I've seen exactly this problem with multi-threaded math libraries, as
well. Using parallel GotoBLAS on FreeBSD gives terrible performance
because the threads keep migrating between CPUs, causing frequent cache
misses.
-Nathan
_______________________________________________
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
