Open MPI logo

Open MPI User's Mailing List Archives

  |   Home   |   Support   |   FAQ   |   all Open MPI User's mailing list

Subject: Re: [OMPI users] Running on two nodes slower than running on one node
From: Victor (victor.major_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-02-01 08:54:24

Thank you all for your help. --bind-to-core increased the cluster
performance by approximately 10%, so in addition to the improvements
through the implementation of Open-MX, the performance now scales within
expectations - not linear, but much better than with the original setup.

On 30 January 2014 20:43, Tim Prince <n8tm_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> On 1/29/2014 11:30 PM, Ralph Castain wrote:
> On Jan 29, 2014, at 7:56 PM, Victor <victor.major_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Thanks for the insights Tim. I was aware that the CPUs will choke beyond
> a certain point. From memory on my machine this happens with 5 concurrent
> MPI jobs with that benchmark that I am using.
> My primary question was about scaling between the nodes. I was not
> getting close to double the performance when running MPI jobs acros two 4
> core nodes. It may be better now since I have Open-MX in place, but I have
> not repeated the benchmarks yet since I need to get one simulation job done
> asap.
> Some of that may be due to expected loss of performance when you switch
> from shared memory to inter-node transports. While it is true about
> saturation of the memory path, what you reported could be more consistent
> with that transition - i.e., it isn't unusual to see applications perform
> better when run on a single node, depending upon how they are written, up
> to a certain size of problem (which your code may not be hitting).
> Regarding your mention of setting affinities and MPI ranks do you have a
> specific (as in syntactically specific since I am a novice and easily
> confused...) examples how I may want to set affinities to get the Westmere
> node performing better?
> mpirun --bind-to-core -cpus-per-rank 2 ...
> will bind each MPI rank to 2 cores. Note that this will definitely *not*
> be a good idea if you are running more than two threads in your process -
> if you are, then set --cpus-per-rank to the number of threads, keeping in
> mind that you want things to break evenly across the sockets. In other
> words, if you have two 6 core/socket Westmere's on the node, then you
> either want to run 6 process at cpus-per-rank=2 if each process runs 2
> threads, or 4 processes with cpus-per-rank=3 if each process runs 3
> threads, or 2 processes with no cpus-per-rank but --bind-to-socket instead
> of --bind-to-core for any other thread number > 3.
> You would not want to run any other number of processes on the node or
> else the binding pattern will cause a single process to split its threads
> across the sockets - which will definitely hurt performance.
> -cpus-per-rank 2 is an effective choice for this platform. As Ralph
> said, it should work automatically for 2 threads per rank.
> Ralph's point about not splitting a process across sockets is an important
> one. Even splitting a process across internal busses, which would happen
> with 3 threads per process, seems problematical.
> --
> Tim Prince
> _______________________________________________
> users mailing list
> users_at_[hidden]