[General] Any linux gurus?

Sun Dec 15 18:50:14 CST 2013

If I'm not invited than I will rescind my message.
On Dec 15, 2013 6:48 PM, "Kyle Centers" <kylecenters at gmail.com> wrote:

> Jeff Cotten says if this thread gets to 50 messages, he'll throw a party.
> So. This is my contribution?
> On Dec 15, 2013 5:37 PM, "James Fluhler" <j.fluhler at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Thanks for the link I will check it out!
>>
>> James F.
>>
>> On Dec 15, 2013, at 4:04 PM, Stephan Henning <shenning at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> -WD
>>
>> I'll check the arrays and see what they are currently formatted as, it's
>> not a big deal to reformat one of these arrays, so that something that can
>> be changed quick and easy.
>>
>> Eh, I'm not involved in the development, but I'll bring it up and if it
>> is something that hasn't been considered I'll put some pressure on them to
>> look into it.
>>
>>
>> -James
>> http://www.ierustech.com/product/v-lox/
>>
>> It's internally built, just got rolled out to market.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Dec 15, 2013 at 2:04 PM, James Fluhler <j.fluhler at gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> I have not heard of VLOX before and a quick google search turned up
>>> nothing? Is it commercially available or internally built? I've typically
>>> used NEC, GEMS, EMDS, and Genesys, for eMag simulation work.
>>>
>>> Just curious but where do you work haha
>>>
>>> James F.
>>>
>>> On Dec 13, 2013, at 11:13 AM, Stephan Henning <shenning at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Method of Moment, Computational ElectroMagnertics.
>>>
>>> Program is called Vlox
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 10:47 AM, David <ainut at knology.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>  MoM CEM vlox -- could you expand those acronyms, please?  Is this a
>>>> logistics planning tool?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Stephan Henning wrote:
>>>>
>>>> -David
>>>>
>>>>  Hmm, sounds interesting. The problem is distributed a little
>>>> currently, you can think of it kind of what is being done as a form of
>>>> monte carlo, so the same run will get repeated many times with light
>>>> parameter adjustments. Each of these can be distributed out to the compute
>>>> nodes very easily, currently this is being done with condor.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  -James
>>>>
>>>>  It's a MoM CEM tool called vlox.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 5:43 AM, James Fluhler <j.fluhler at gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>  I'm just curious what simulation program are you running? I've used
>>>>> a number in the past that also utilize the GPU's for processing.
>>>>>
>>>>> James F.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Dec 12, 2013, at 11:28 PM, David <ainut at knology.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>   IIRC, the good thing about this cluster is the automagic load
>>>>> leveling.  Your existing binary may not run at max optimization but if the
>>>>> task can be spread among processors, Beowulf does a nice job of it.  If
>>>>> each computer has it's own GPU(s), then all the better.
>>>>>
>>>>> You can test it right there without changing anything on the system's
>>>>> disks.  Just create and run all the cluster members off a CD.
>>>>>
>>>>> Then to test, pick the fastest one of them (maybe even your existing
>>>>> Xeon box), run your benchmark, record execution time, then boot all the
>>>>> other machines in the cluster and run it again.  There are only about two
>>>>> dozen steps to set it up.  One professor even put most of those, along with
>>>>> automatic cluster setup(!) as a downloadable you can boot off of.  That
>>>>> leaves half a dozen steps to tweak the cluster together, then you're good
>>>>> to go.  I have one of those CD's around here somewhere and I can get
>>>>> details if you're interested.  Something to play with.  I did it with only
>>>>> 4 pc's around the house with some code and even though the code was never
>>>>> designed for a cluster (just multiprocessing), I got about 40% decrease in
>>>>> execution time.  The code was almost completely linear execution so I'm
>>>>> surprised it got any improvement but it did.
>>>>>
>>>>> David
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Stephan Henning wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> -WD
>>>>>
>>>>>  I believe it's either ext3 or ext4, I'd have to ssh in and check
>>>>> when I get back on Monday.
>>>>>
>>>>>  -David
>>>>>
>>>>>  I'll check into the Beowulf and see what that would entail. I'll try
>>>>> and talk with the developer and see what their thoughts are on the
>>>>> feasibility of running it on a cluster. They may have already gone down
>>>>> this path and rejected it, but I'll check anyway.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 6:16 PM, David <ainut at knology.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Sounds like a perfect candidate for a Beowulf cluster to me.  There
>>>>>> are possibly some gotcha's but you'll have the same problems with just a
>>>>>> single computer.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Velly intewesting.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Stephan Henning wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  -WD
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The GPUs are sent data in chunks that they then process and return.
>>>>>>> The time it takes a GPU to process a chunk can vary, so I assume the bottle
>>>>>>> necks we were seeing was when several of the GPU cores would finish at
>>>>>>> about the same time and request a new chunk and the chunk they needed
>>>>>>> wasn't already in RAM, so the drive array would take a heavy hit.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Beyond that, I can't really give you a numerical value as to the
>>>>>>> amount of data they are dumping into the pcie bus.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -David
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ya, not sure an FPGA exists large enough for this, it would be
>>>>>>> interesting though.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> While the process isn't entirely sequential, data previously
>>>>>>> processed is reused in the processing of other data, so that has kept us
>>>>>>> away from trying a cluster approach.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Depending on the problem, anywhere from minutes per iteration, to
>>>>>>> weeks per iteration. The weeks long problems are sitting at about 3TB I
>>>>>>> believe. We've only run benchmark problems on the SSDs up till now, so we
>>>>>>> haven't had the experience of seeing how they react once they start really
>>>>>>> getting full.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  Sadly, 2TB of RAM would not be enough. I looked into this Dell box (
>>>>>>> http://www8.hp.com/us/en/products/proliant-servers/product-detail.html?oid=4231377#!tab=features<
>>>>>>> http://www8.hp.com/us/en/products/proliant-servers/product-detail.html?oid=4231377#%21tab=features>)
>>>>>>> that would take 4TB, but the costs were insane and it can't support enough
>>>>>>> GPUs to actually do anything with the RAM...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  <<<snip>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> General mailing list
>>>>>> General at lists.makerslocal.org
>>>>>> http://lists.makerslocal.org/mailman/listinfo/general
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> General mailing listGeneral at lists.makerslocal.orghttp://lists.makerslocal.org/mailman/listinfo/general
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>   _______________________________________________
>>>>> General mailing list
>>>>> General at lists.makerslocal.org
>>>>> http://lists.makerslocal.org/mailman/listinfo/general
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> General mailing list
>>>>> General at lists.makerslocal.org
>>>>> http://lists.makerslocal.org/mailman/listinfo/general
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> General mailing listGeneral at lists.makerslocal.orghttp://lists.makerslocal.org/mailman/listinfo/general
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> General mailing list
>>>> General at lists.makerslocal.org
>>>> http://lists.makerslocal.org/mailman/listinfo/general
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> General mailing list
>>> General at lists.makerslocal.org
>>> http://lists.makerslocal.org/mailman/listinfo/general
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> General mailing list
>>> General at lists.makerslocal.org
>>> http://lists.makerslocal.org/mailman/listinfo/general
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> General mailing list
>> General at lists.makerslocal.org
>> http://lists.makerslocal.org/mailman/listinfo/general
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> General mailing list
>> General at lists.makerslocal.org
>> http://lists.makerslocal.org/mailman/listinfo/general
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> General mailing list
> General at lists.makerslocal.org
> http://lists.makerslocal.org/mailman/listinfo/general
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.makerslocal.org/pipermail/general/attachments/20131215/1114091b/attachment-0001.html>