Open MPI Development Mailing List Archives

Subject: Re: [OMPI devel] Very poor performance with btl sm on twin nehalem servers with Mellanox ConnectX installed
From: Christopher Samuel (samuel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-05-17 20:33:22

• Next message: Abhishek Kulkarni: "Re: [OMPI devel] RFC 2/2: merge the OPAL SOS development branch into trunk"
• Previous message: Jeff Squyres: "Re: [OMPI devel] RFC: Remove all other paffinity components"
• In reply to: Jeff Squyres: "Re: [OMPI devel] Very poor performance with btl sm on twin nehalem servers with Mellanox ConnectX installed"
• Next in thread: Paul H. Hargrove: "Re: [OMPI devel] Very poor performance with btl sm on twin nehalem servers with Mellanox ConnectX installed"

On 18/05/10 07:02, Jeff Squyres wrote:

> What's the advantage of /dev/shm? (I don't know anything
> about /dev/shm)

Looking at our CentOS 5.4 install /dev/shm is a tmpfs
filesystem (defaults to use up to 1/2 RAM of the system)
and hence should give lightning fast file I/O.

More info here:

http://wiki.linuxquestions.org/wiki/Tmpfs

cheers!
Chris

-- 
  Christopher Samuel - Senior Systems Administrator
  VLSCI - Victorian Life Sciences Computational Initiative
  Email: samuel_at_[hidden] Phone: +61 (0)3 903 55545
          http://www.vlsci.unimelb.edu.au/

• text/html attachment: attachment

• Next message: Abhishek Kulkarni: "Re: [OMPI devel] RFC 2/2: merge the OPAL SOS development branch into trunk"
• Previous message: Jeff Squyres: "Re: [OMPI devel] RFC: Remove all other paffinity components"
• In reply to: Jeff Squyres: "Re: [OMPI devel] Very poor performance with btl sm on twin nehalem servers with Mellanox ConnectX installed"
• Next in thread: Paul H. Hargrove: "Re: [OMPI devel] Very poor performance with btl sm on twin nehalem servers with Mellanox ConnectX installed"