George Bosilca <bosi...@icl.utk.edu> writes:

> Dave,
>
> You are absolutely right, the parameters are now 6-7 years old,
> gathered on interconnects long gone. Moreover, several discussions in
> this mailing list indicated that they do not match current network
> capabilities.
>
> I have recently reshuffled the tuned module to move all the algorithms
> in the base and therefore make them available to other collective
> modules (the code is available in master and 1.10 and the future
> 2.0). This move has the potential for allowing different decision
> schemes to coexists, and be dynamically selected at runtime based on
> network properties, network topology, or even applications needs. I
> continue to have hopes that network vendors will eventually get
> interested in tailoring the collective selection to match their
> network capabilities, and provide their users with a performance boost
> by allowing for network specific algorithm selection.

That sounds useful, assuming the speed is generally dominated by the
basic fabric.  What's involved in making the relevant measurements and
plugging them in?  I did look at using OTPO(?) to check this sort of
thing once.  I couldn't make it work in the time I had, but Periscope
might be a good alternative now.

If it's fairly mechanical -- maybe even if not -- it seems like
something that should just be done regardless of vendors.  I'm sure
plenty of people could measure QDR fat tree, for a start (at least where
measurement isn't frowned upon).

Reply via email to