[mpich-discuss] halo update performance comparison

Mon Jan 13 15:58:49 CST 2014

II should be able to package up my test case.
Please let me know if I can help

Daniel Kokron
NASA Ames (ARC-TN)
SciCon group
301-286-3959

________________________________________
From: discuss-bounces at mpich.org [discuss-bounces at mpich.org] on behalf of Rajeev Thakur [thakur at mcs.anl.gov]
Sent: Monday, January 13, 2014 4:45 PM
To: discuss at mpich.org
Subject: Re: [mpich-discuss] halo update performance comparison

> Is there room for improvement?

Yes, we are looking into it.

Rajeev

On Dec 13, 2013, at 2:31 PM, "Kokron, Daniel S. (GSFC-610.1)[Computer Sciences Corporation]" <daniel.s.kokron at nasa.gov> wrote:

> All,
>
> I have been interested in MPI datatypes since reading about them and playing with the benchmark found at http://unixer.de/research/datatypes/ddtbench/
>
> I am working with a weather model that spends considerable time doing halo (aka ghost cell) updates.  The existing code uses irecv/isend.  Since most of the time spent doing halo updates is actually spent packing and unpacking the MPI buffers, I was hoping the use of datatypes would improve performance.  Unfortunately, the datatype version is actually quite a bit slower than the standard non-blocking pt2pt code.  I found this to be that case for both mpich-3.1rc1 and a recent version of a vendor MPI implementation (not MPICH based).  I have not run this comparison using OpenMPI.
>
> Is data type performance an active area of development?  Is there room for improvement?
>
> Daniel Kokron
> NASA Ames (ARC-TN)
> SciCon group
> 301-286-3959
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list     discuss at mpich.org
> To manage subscription options or unsubscribe:
> https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

_______________________________________________
discuss mailing list     discuss at mpich.org
To manage subscription options or unsubscribe:
https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss