Re: [mpich-discuss] discuss Digest, Vol 91, Issue 5
On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 5:17 PM <[email protected]> wrote:
Send discuss mailing list submissions to [email protected]
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to [email protected]
You can reach the person managing the list at [email protected]
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of discuss digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Better alternatives of MPI_Allreduce() (Benson Muite) 2. Re: Better alternatives of MPI_Allreduce() (Benson Muite) 3. Re: Better alternatives of MPI_Allreduce() (hritikesh semwal)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1 Date: Tue, 05 May 2020 14:20:57 +0300 From: "Benson Muite" <[email protected]> To: "Benson Muite via discuss" <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected] Subject: [mpich-discuss] Better alternatives of MPI_Allreduce() Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Hi Hitesh,
What hardware are you running on and what is the interconnect?
Right now I am using a cluster.
What is the interconnect?
Have you tried changing any of the MPI settings?
What do you mean by MPI settings?
Given your comment on the barrier, this is probably not so useful at the moment.
Can the reduction be done asynchronously?
I did not get your question.
For example using a non blocking all reduce: https://www.mpi-forum.org/docs/mpi-3.1/mpi31-report/node135.htm
Regards, Benson
Also, is your work load balanced? One way to check this might be to
place a barrier just before the all-reduce call. If the barrier ends up taking most of your time, then it is likely you will need to determine a better way to distribute the computational work.
Thanks for your response.
Yes, you are right. I have put barrier just before Allreduce and out of
the total time consumed by Allreduce, 79% time is consumed by the barrier. But my computational work is balanced. Right now, I have distributed 97336 cells among 24 processors and maximum and minimum cell distribution among all processors is 4057 and 4055 respectively which is not too bad. Is there any solution to get rid of this.
participants (1)
-
hritikesh semwal