Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: new supercomputer!

Author: Robert Hyatt

Date: 22:30:18 05/15/04

Go up one level in this thread


On May 14, 2004 at 20:43:24, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:

>On May 14, 2004 at 08:23:41, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>
>The difference between some cc-NUMA machines and clusters is only the fact that
>the first one uses software from SGI and the second one from IBM.
>
>It's just a software layer.

Utter and total nonsense.

But I won't bore others with the datails of why that is so far beyond ridiculous
that it doesn't even deserve a response.

but NUMA --> shared memory.  Clusters don't do shared memory.


>
>>On May 13, 2004 at 23:58:43, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
>>
>>>On May 13, 2004 at 12:46:29, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>>
>>>>On May 13, 2004 at 07:47:32, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On May 13, 2004 at 03:09:22, Joshua Shriver wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>Question is... are they going to run a parallel based chess engine on it :)
>>>>>
>>>>>Only diep would run at it, and they didn't approach me.
>>>>
>>>>I can't _possibly_ imagine why "they don't approach you."
>>>>
>>>>Also you do know this is a cluster?  Not a NUMA box?
>>>>
>>>>Of course you did.
>>>>
>>>>I'm sure your program does _great_ on a message-passing cluster...
>>>
>>>May i remind you your message passing cluster you get there has a faster one way
>>>pingpong latency than origin3800 at 512 processors....
>>
>>May I remind you that NUMA and clusters are _two_ different things???
>>
>>Or is it pointless???
>>
>>Clusters have _zero_ shared memory.
>>
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> AFAIK their only plan is
>>>>>to build a 50 tflop machine for 50 million dollar and the rest is unclear.
>>>>
>>>>Nothing is unclear at all.  Oak Ridge is one of our national labs, just like Los
>>>>Alamos, Lawrence-Livermore, etc.  They always strive to "push the envelope"
>>>>although this world of "clusters" is not as interesting as the old days of "real
>>>>super-computers"...  They have applications that run for months at a time.  And
>>>>they'd like to increase the size of the data but that would push the
>>>>applications into years of run-time.  Faster processing demands is what is
>>>>driving this.
>>>>
>>>>But anyone could find that out by looking around or asking...



This page took 0 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.