[General] Any linux gurus?

Jeff Cotten omegix at gmail.com
Sun Dec 15 19:26:45 CST 2013 

Hoooray! Happy 50! Cake to come!
On Dec 15, 2013 7:25 PM, "Erik Arendall" <earendall at gmail.com> wrote:

> Pfffftttt!!!!!!
> On Dec 15, 2013 7:21 PM, "Barbara Attilio" <barbara.attili at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> What , you think I'm made of money? Also, rainbow balloons. Maybe 3. One
>> half deflated out of spite.
>> On Dec 15, 2013 7:16 PM, "Erik Arendall" <earendall at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> 99 luftballoons?
>>> On Dec 15, 2013 6:55 PM, "Barbara Attilio" <barbara.attili at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> 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
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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/20131215/381b7a62/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the General mailing list