[General] Any linux gurus?

Sun Dec 15 18:54:03 CST 2013

I can bring balloons!
On Dec 15, 2013 6:53 PM, "enabrintain at yahoo.com" <enabrintain at yahoo.com>
wrote:

> I want a cookie cake!
>
> *Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID*
>
>
> Justin Richards <ratmandu at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Woohoo!
> 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
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20131215/6add1059/attachment-0001.html>