This web mail archive is frozen.
This page is part of a frozen web archive of this mailing list.
You can still navigate around this archive, but know that no new mails
have been added to it since July of 2016.
Click here to be taken to the new web archives of this list; it includes all the mails that are in this frozen archive plus all new mails that have been sent to the list since it was migrated to the new archives.
Sorry on the mvapich2 reference :)
All nodes are attached over a common 1GigE network. We wish ofcourse that
if a node-pair is connected via a higher-speed fabric *as well* (IB FDR or
10GigE) then that this would be leveraged instead of the common 1GigE.
One question: suppose that we use nodes having either FDR or QDR IB
interfaces available, connected to one common IB fabric, all defined over a
common IP subnet: Will OpenMPI have any problem with this? Can MPI
communication take place over this type of hybrid IB fabric? We already
have a sub-cluster with QDR HCAs and we are attaching it to IB fabric with
FDR "backbone" and another cluster with FDR HCAs.
Do you think there may be some issue with this? The HCAs are FDR and QDR
Mellanox devices and the switching is also over FDR Mellanox fabric.
Mellanox claims that at the IB level this is doable (i.e., FDR link pairs
talk to each other at FDR speeds and QDR link pairs at QDR).
I guess if we use the RC connection types then it does not matter to
On Fri, Jul 5, 2013 at 4:59 PM, Ralph Castain <rhc_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> I can't speak for MVAPICH - you probably need to ask them about this
> scenario. OMPI will automatically select whatever available transport that
> can reach the intended process. This requires that each communicating pair
> of processes have access to at least one common transport.
> So if a process that is on a node with only 1G-E wants to communicate with
> another process, then the node where that other process is running must
> also have access to a compatible Ethernet interface (1G can talk to 10G, so
> they can have different capabilities) on that subnet (or on a subnet that
> knows how to route to the other one). If both nodes have 10G-E as well as
> 1G-E interfaces, then OMPI will automatically take the 10G interface as it
> is the faster of the two.
> Note this means that if a process is on a node that only has IB, and wants
> to communicate to a process on a node that only has 1G-E, then the two
> processes cannot communicate.
> On Jul 5, 2013, at 2:34 PM, Michael Thomadakis <drmichaelt7777_at_[hidden]>
> Hello OpenMPI
> We area seriously considering deploying OpenMPI 1.6.5 for production (and
> 1.7.2 for testing) on HPC clusters which consists of nodes with *different
> types of networking interfaces*.
> 1) Interface selection
> We are using OpenMPI 1.6.5 and was wondering how one would go about
> selecting* at run time* which networking interface to use for MPI
> communications in case that both IB, 10GigE and 1 GigE are present.
> This issues arises in a cluster with nodes that are equipped with
> different types of interfaces:
> *Some *have both IB-QDR or FDR and 10- and 1-GigE. Others *only* have
> 10-GigE and 1-GigE and simply others only 1-GigE.
> 2) OpenMPI 1.6.5 level of support for Heterogeneous Fabric
> Can OpenMPI support running an MPI application using a mix of nodes with
> all of the above networking interface combinations ?
> 2.a) Can the same MPI code (SPMD or MPMD) have a subset of its ranks run
> on nodes with QDR IB and another subset on FDR IB simultaneously? These are
> Mellanox QDR and FDR HCAs.
> Mellanox mentioned to us that they support both QDR and FDR HCAs attached
> to the same IB subnet. Do you think MVAPICH2 will have any issue with this?
> 2.b) Can the same MPI code (SPMD or MPMD) have a subset of its ranks run
> on nodes with IB and another subset over 10GiGE simultaneously?
> That is imagine nodes I1, I2, ..., IN having say QDR HCAs and nodes G1,
> G2, GM having only 10GigE interfaces. Could we have the same MPI
> application run across both types of nodes?
> Or should there be say 2 communicators with one of them explicitly
> overlaid on a IB only subnet and the other on a 10GigE only subnet?
> Please let me know if the above are not very clear.
> Thank you much
> users mailing list
> users mailing list