Author: Jay Urbanski
Date: 11:37:25 07/07/03
Go up one level in this thread
On July 07, 2003 at 10:48:02, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On July 05, 2003 at 23:37:47, Jay Urbanski wrote: > >>On July 04, 2003 at 23:33:46, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >><snip> >>>"way better than MPI". Both use TCP/IP, just like PVM. Except that MPI/OpenMP >>>is designed for homogeneous clusters while PVM works with heterogeneous mixes. >>>But for any of the above, the latency is caused by TCP/IP, _not_ the particular >>>library being used. >> >>With latency a concern I don't know why you'd use TCP/IP as the transport for >>MPI when there are much faster ones available. >> >>Even VIA over Ethernet would be an improvement. > >I use VIA over ethernet, and VIA over a cLAN giganet switch as well. The >cLAN hardware produces .5usec latench which is about 1000X better than any >TCP/IP-ethernet implementation. However, ethernet will never touch good >hardware like the cLAN stuff. > >MPI/PVM use ethernet - tcp/ip for one obvious reason: "portability" and >"availability". :) Well, there are plenty of MPI/PVM implementations that don't TCP/IP. MPICH-GM, for instance, and PVM-GM over Myrinet. If you're planning to use a cluster for chess, I would imagine you'd use the fastest switch available and bypasss TCP/IP for performance reasons.
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.