From owner-pbwg-lowlevel@CS.UTK.EDU Wed Mar 24 07:03:07 1993 Received: from CS.UTK.EDU by surfer.EPM.ORNL.GOV (5.61/1.34) id AA07972; Wed, 24 Mar 93 07:03:07 -0500 Received: from localhost by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (5.61+IDA+UTK-930125/2.8s-UTK) id AA11483; Wed, 24 Mar 93 07:03:00 -0500 X-Resent-To: pbwg-lowlevel@CS.UTK.EDU ; Wed, 24 Mar 1993 07:02:59 EST Errors-To: owner-pbwg-lowlevel@CS.UTK.EDU Received: from sun2.nsfnet-relay.ac.uk by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (5.61+IDA+UTK-930125/2.8s-UTK) id AA11474; Wed, 24 Mar 93 07:02:50 -0500 Via: uk.ac.southampton.ecs; Wed, 24 Mar 1993 11:56:04 +0000 From: R.Hockney@parallel-applications-centre.southampton.ac.uk Via: calvados.pac.soton.ac.uk (plonk); Wed, 24 Mar 93 11:48:57 GMT Date: Wed, 24 Mar 93 11:54:47 GMT Message-Id: <3347.9303241154@calvados.pac.soton.ac.uk> Apparently-To: pbwg-lowlevel@cs.utk.edu This is a test message, please tell me if you have received it Roger Hockney From owner-pbwg-lowlevel@CS.UTK.EDU Wed Mar 24 07:10:01 1993 Received: from CS.UTK.EDU by surfer.EPM.ORNL.GOV (5.61/1.34) id AA09541; Wed, 24 Mar 93 07:10:01 -0500 Received: from localhost by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (5.61+IDA+UTK-930125/2.8s-UTK) id AA11675; Wed, 24 Mar 93 07:09:47 -0500 X-Resent-To: pbwg-lowlevel@CS.UTK.EDU ; Wed, 24 Mar 1993 07:09:46 EST Errors-To: owner-pbwg-lowlevel@CS.UTK.EDU Received: from sun2.nsfnet-relay.ac.uk by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (5.61+IDA+UTK-930125/2.8s-UTK) id AA11667; Wed, 24 Mar 93 07:09:43 -0500 Via: uk.ac.southampton.ecs; Wed, 24 Mar 1993 12:07:26 +0000 From: R.Hockney@parallel-applications-centre.southampton.ac.uk Via: calvados.pac.soton.ac.uk (plonk); Wed, 24 Mar 93 11:48:57 GMT Date: Wed, 24 Mar 93 11:54:47 GMT Message-Id: <3347.9303241154@calvados.pac.soton.ac.uk> Apparently-To: pbwg-lowlevel@cs.utk.edu This is a test message, please tell me if you have received it Roger Hockney From owner-pbwg-lowlevel@CS.UTK.EDU Fri Apr 30 12:31:40 1993 Received: from CS.UTK.EDU by surfer.EPM.ORNL.GOV (5.61/1.34) id AA18426; Fri, 30 Apr 93 12:31:40 -0400 Received: from localhost by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (5.61+IDA+UTK-930125/2.8s-UTK) id AA22998; Fri, 30 Apr 93 12:31:04 -0400 X-Resent-To: pbwg-lowlevel@CS.UTK.EDU ; Fri, 30 Apr 1993 12:31:03 EDT Errors-To: owner-pbwg-lowlevel@CS.UTK.EDU Received: from sun2.nsfnet-relay.ac.uk by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (5.61+IDA+UTK-930125/2.8s-UTK) id AA22985; Fri, 30 Apr 93 12:31:00 -0400 Via: uk.ac.southampton.ecs; Fri, 30 Apr 1993 17:01:36 +0100 From: R.Hockney@parallel-applications-centre.southampton.ac.uk Via: calvados.pac.soton.ac.uk (plonk); Fri, 30 Apr 93 16:54:21 BST Date: Fri, 30 Apr 93 15:07:06 GMT Message-Id: <15922.9304301507@calvados.pac.soton.ac.uk> Original-Received: Pp-Warning: Illegal Received field on preceding line Apparently-To: ~r benlet2.asc From owner-pbwg-lowlevel@CS.UTK.EDU Fri Apr 30 12:31:43 1993 Received: from CS.UTK.EDU by surfer.EPM.ORNL.GOV (5.61/1.34) id AA18443; Fri, 30 Apr 93 12:31:43 -0400 Received: from localhost by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (5.61+IDA+UTK-930125/2.8s-UTK) id AA22988; Fri, 30 Apr 93 12:31:01 -0400 X-Resent-To: pbwg-lowlevel@CS.UTK.EDU ; Fri, 30 Apr 1993 12:30:46 EDT Errors-To: owner-pbwg-lowlevel@CS.UTK.EDU Received: from sun2.nsfnet-relay.ac.uk by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (5.61+IDA+UTK-930125/2.8s-UTK) id AA22904; Fri, 30 Apr 93 12:30:25 -0400 Via: uk.ac.southampton.ecs; Fri, 30 Apr 1993 16:09:52 +0100 From: R.Hockney@parallel-applications-centre.southampton.ac.uk Via: calvados.pac.soton.ac.uk (plonk); Fri, 30 Apr 93 16:01:59 BST Date: Fri, 30 Apr 93 15:09:09 GMT Message-Id: <15924.9304301509@calvados.pac.soton.ac.uk> To: pbwg-lowlevel@cs.utk.edu Subject: Draft Report Chapter-2 FIRST DRAFT LOW-LEVEL CHAPTER ----------------------------- I have put together below my thoughts on the contents of the low-level benchmarks, which are mostly what we have at Southampton and in my own work. This is for comment and to merge with contributions from other subcommittee members (none in yet), and finally for presentation to 24 May 1993 meeting of PBWG. I believe we need basic multi-processor benchmarks to measure various global operations in addition to SYNCH1 (e.g. global sum and multiply reduction, global 'or' and 'and', etc). Perhaps other members have these or would like to write benchmarks and suggest appropriate metrics to use. I heard some talk about the alpha and beta parameters at the last meeting. Can someone tell me what they measure and send me the appropriate reference. Thank you, Yours sincerely Roger Hockney (leader low-level benchmark subcommittee) There follows latex version of draft of low-level chapter ------------------------ cut here ----------------------------------------- %file: lowlev1.tex \chapter{Low-Level Benchmarks} \footnote{assembled by Roger Hockney for low-level subcommittee} \section{Single-Processor Benchmarks} \subsection{Timer resolution: TICK1} TICK1 measures the interval between ticks of the clock being used in the benchmark measurements. That is to say the resolution of the clock. A succession of calls to the timer routine are inserted in a loop and executed many times. The differences between successive values given by the timer are then examined. If the changes in the clock value (or ticks) occur less frequently than the time taken to enter and leave the timer routine, then most of these differences will be zero. When a tick takes place, however, a difference equal to the tick value will be recorded, surrounded by many zero differences. This is the case with clocks of poor resolution, for example most UNIX clocks that tick typically every 10 ms. Such poor UNIX clocks can still be used for low-level benchmark measurements if the benchmark is repeated, say, 10,000 times, and the timer calls are made outside this repeat loop. With some computers, such as the CRAY series, the clock ticks every cycle of the computer, that is to say every 6ns on the Y-MP. The resolution of the CRAY clock is therefore approximately one million times better than a UNIX clock, and that is quite a difference! If TICK1 is used on such a computer the difference between successive values of the timer is a very accurate measure of how long it takes to execute the instructions of the timer routine, and therefore is never zero. TICK1 takes the minimum of all such differences, and all it is possible to say is that the clock tick is less than or equal to this value. Typically this minimum will be several hundreds of clock ticks. With a clock ticking every computer cycle, we can make low-level benchmark measurements without a repeat loop. Such measurements can even be made on a busy timeshared system (where many users are contending for memory access) by taking the minumum time recorded from a sample of, say, 10,000 single execution measurements. In this case, the minimum can usually be said to apply to a case when there was no memory access delay caused by other users. TICK1 exists and forms part of the Genesis benchmarks v2.0 and v2.1.1 ~\cite{Hey91}. \subsection{Timer value: TICK2} TICK2 confirms that correctness of the time values returned by the computer clock, by comparing its measurement of a given time interval with that of an external wall-clock (actually the benchmarker's wristwatch). Parallel benchmark performance can only be measured using the elapsed wall-clock time, as the objective of parallel execution is to reduce this time. Measurements made with a CPU-timer (which only records time when its job is executing in the CPU) are clearly incorrect, because the clock does not record waiting time when the job is out of the CPU. TICK2 will immediately detect the incorrect use of a CPU-time-for-this-job-only clock. An example of a timer that claims to measure elapsed time but is actually a CPU-timer, is the returned value of the popular Sun UNIX timer ETIME. TICK2 also checks that the correct multiplier is being used in the computer system software to convert clock ticks to true seconds. TICK2 exists and will form part of the next release of the Genesis benchmarks v2.2 ~\cite{Hey91}. \subsection{Most Reported Benchmark: LINPACKD (n=100)} This well-known standard benchmark is a Fortran program for the solution of (100x100) dense set of linear equations by Gaussian elimination. It is distributed by Dr J. J. Dongarra of the University of Tennessee. The results are quoted in Mflop/s and are regularly published and available by electronic mail. The main value of this benchmark is that results are known for more computers than any other benchmark. Most of the compute time is contained in vectorisable DO-loops such as the DAXPY (scalar times vector plus vector) and inner product. Therefore one expects vector computers to perform well on this benchmark. The weakness of the benchmark is that it tests only a small number of vector operations, but it does include the effect of memory access and it is solving a complete (although small) real problem. \subsection{Performance Range: The Livermore Loops} These are a set of 24 Fortran DO-loops (or kernels) extracted from operational codes used at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory \cite{Ma88}. They have been used since the early seventies to assess the arithmetic performance of computers and their compilers. They are a mixture of vectorisable and non-vectorisable loops and test rather fully the computational capabilities of the hardware, and the skill of the software in compiling efficient code, and in vectorisation. The main value of the benchmark is the range of performance that it demonstrates, and in this respect it complements the limited range of loops tested in the LINPACK benchmark. The benchmark provides the individual performance of each loop, together with various averages (arithmetic, geometric, harmonic) and the quartiles of the distribution. However, it is difficult to give a clear meaning to these averages, and the value of the benchmark is more in the distribution itself. In particular, the maximum and minimum give the range of likely performance in full applications. The ratio of maximum to minimum performance has been called the {\em instability} or the {\em speciality} ~\cite{Hoc91}, and is a measure of how difficult it is to obtain good performance from the computer, and therefore how specialised it is. The minimum or worst performance obtained on these loops is of special value, because there is much truth in the saying that "the best computer to choose is that with the best worst-performance". \subsection{Basic Arithmetic Operations: RINF1} This benchmark takes a set of common Fortran DO-loops and analyses their time of execution in terms of the two parameters \rnhalf ~\cite{Hoc77,HoJe81,Hoc82,Hoc83,Hoc87,HoJe88}. \rinf is the asymptotic performance rate in Mflop/s which is approached as the loop (or vector) length ,$n$, becomes longer. \nhalf (the half-performance length) expresses how rapidly, in terms increasing vector length, the actual performance, $r$, approaches \rinf. It is defined as the vector length required to achieve a performance of one half of \rinf. This means that the time, $t$, for a DO-loop corresponding to $v$ vector operations (i.e. with $v$ floating-point operations per element per iteration) is approximated by: \begin{equation} t = v * ( n + \nhalf ) / \rinf \label{Eqn1} \end{equation} Then the performance rate is given by \begin{equation} r = \frac{v*n}{t} = \frac{\rinf}{(1+\nhalf /n)} \label{Eqn2} \end{equation} We can see from Eqn.(\ref{Eqn1}) that \nhalf is a way of measuring the importance of vector startup overhead (=\nhalf/\rinf) in terms of quantities known to the programmer (loop or vector length). In the benchmark program, the two parameters are determined by a least-squares fit of the data to the straight line defined by Eqn.(\ref{Eqn1}). A useful guide to the significance of \nhalf is to note from Eqn.(\ref{Eqn2}) that 80 percent of the asymptotic performance is achieved for vectors of length $4*\nhalf$. Generally speaking, \nhalf values of upto about 50 are tolerable, whereas the performance of computers with larger values of \nhalf is severely constrained by the need to keep vector lengths significantly longer than \nhalf. This requirement makes the computers difficult to program efficiently, and often leads to disappointing performance, compared to the asymptotic rate advertised by the manufacturer. RINF1 exists as part of the Hockney and Genesis benchmarks v2.0 and v2.1.1 ~\cite{Hey91}. An independently written version forms module MOD1AC of the EuroBen benchmarks ~\cite{StRi93}. \subsection{Memory-Bottleneck Benchmarks: POLY1 and POLY2} Even if the vector lengths are long enough to overcome the vector startup overhead, the peak rate of the arithmetic pipelines may not be realised because of the delays associated with obtaining data from the cache or main memory of the computer. The POLY1 benchmark attempts to quantify this dependence of computer performance on memory access bottlenecks. The computational intensity, $f$, of a DO-loop is defined as the number of floating-point operations (flop) performed per memory reference (mref) to an element of a vector variable ~\cite{HoJe88}. The asymptotic performance, \rinf, of a computer is observed to increase as the computational intensity increases, because as this becomes larger, the effects of memory access delays become negligible compared to the time spent on arithmetic. This effect is characterised by the two parameters (\rhat,\fhalf), where \rhat~ is the peak hardware performance of the arithmetic pipeline, and \fhalf is the computational intensity required to achieve half this rate. That is to say the asymptotic performance is given by: \begin{equation} \rinf = \frac{\rhat}{(1+\fhalf/f)} \label{Eqn3} \end{equation} If memory access and arithmetic are not overlapped, then \fhalf can be shown to be the ratio of arithmetic speed (in Mflop/s) to memory access speed (in Mword/s). The parameter \fhalf, like \nhalf, measures an unwanted overhead and should be as small as possible. In order to vary $f$ and allow the peak performance to be approached, we choose a kernel loop that can be computed with maximum efficiency on any hardware. This is the evaluation of a polynomial by Horner's rule, in which case the computational intensity is the order of the polynomial, and both the multiply and add pipelines are used. To measure \fhalf, the order of the polynomial is increased from one to ten, and the measured performance for long vectors is fitted to Eqn.(\ref{Eqn3}). The POLY1 benchmark repeats the polynomial evaluation for each order typically 1000 times for vector lengths upto 10,000, which would normally fit into the cache of a cache-based processor. Except for the first evaluation the data will therefore be found in the cache. POLY1 is therefore an {\em in-cache} test of the memory bottleneck between the arithmetic registers of the processor and its cache. POLY2, on the other hand, flushes the cache prior to each different order and then performs only one polynomial evaluation, for vector lengths from 10,000 upto 100,000, which would normally exceed the cache size. Data will have to be brought from off-chip memory, and POLY2 is an {\em out-of-cache} test of the memory bottleneck between off-chip memory and the arithmetic registers. The POLY1 benchmark exists as MOD1G of the EuroBen benchmarks ~cite{StRi93}. POLY2 exists as part of the Hockney benchmarks. \subsection{Arithmetic Benchmark Results} As an indication of the type of results given by the proposed low-level arithmetic benchmarks, Table-\ref{Table1} gives measurements made on a number of workstations, and microprocessor chips that are used as processing nodes in multiprocessor MIMD computers. \begin{table} \centering {\small \parbox{5in}{\caption{\label{Table1} Performance of some common numerical benchmarks on some common workstations and microprocessor chips used in MIMD computers. Measurements were made with the highest level of optimisation that ran, and are in Mflop/s for 64-bit precision, except where stated in parentheses. The units of \nhalf are vector length, and \fhalf are flop/mref (floating-point operations per memory reference). Results are for the best generally available compiler on the date shown. Those for the i860 are for the first Greenhills compiler which is known not to use many important i860 hardware features. Later more advanced compilers should give significantly better results. }} \begin{tabular}{lccccccc} \hline &Sun &Solbourne&Stardent&Inmos&Intel&IBM RS/ &DEC \\ Benchmark &Sparc1&System 5 &TS2025 &T800 &i860 &6000-530 &$\alpha$\\ & & & &20MHz &40MHz& 25MHz &133MHz \\ \hline d/m/y &18/1/90&25/1/90 &8/8/89 &15/4/89&6/8/90&14/6/90&13/1/93 \\ % m/y & 1/90 & 1/90 & 8/89 & 4/89 & 8/90 & 6/90 & 1/93 \\ \hline Linpackd & 1.27 & 2.79 & 4.32 & 0.33 & 3.89 & 9.54 & 20.7 \\ n=100 \\ \hline Livermore & 2.36 & 4.64 & & 0.72 & 8.76 & 31.8 & 46.6 \\ Maximum \\ \hline Livermore & 0.45 & 0.89 & 0.45 & 0.10 & 0.47 & 1.34 & 4.47 \\ Minimum \\ \hline RINF1(32') \\ \rinf & 1.29 & 2.50 &19.29 & 0.34 & 4.62 & 5.13 & 33.8 \\ (\nhalf) &(0.30)& (1.00) &(1.03) & (0) &(3.61) & &(12.2) \\ \hline POLY1 \\ \rhat & 2.50 & 5.18 &42.31 & &10.59 &25.85 & 88.9\\ (\fhalf) &(0.77)& (0.60) &(0.51) & &(1.12) &(0.34)& (0.71)\\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} } \end{table} Table-\ref{Table1} shows that the DEC $\alpha$ chip outperforms all other workstations and chips on all benchmarks by a significant margin, as befits the start of a new generation of chips. However, one cannot help being impressed by the figures. The remaining workstations and chips are compared with each other below. Table-\ref{Table1} shows that the IBM RS/6000 chip set performs best on the LINPACKD100 benchmark, followed by the Stardent ST2025 which has a vector architecture. The i860 performs significantly worse than the IBM 6000. However the benchmark performance of both machines is expected to improve as their compilers develop. Table-\ref{Table1} gives the maximum and minimum performance observed in the 24 Livermore loops. The minimum performance can be taken as giving the worst scalar arithmetic performance that is likely to be found, and the maximum gives the best performance that is likely to be seen on highly vectorisable loops. The computer with the best worst-performance, which is a very good metric to examine, is the IBM RS/6000 followed by the Solbourne. The best maximum performance is seen in the RS/6000 followed by the i860. The RINF1 benchmark gives values of the \rnhalf parameters for the kernel A=B*C (vector = vector $\times$ vector), and shows the Stardent ST2025 performing best with the highest \rinf and lowest \nhalf, followed by the IBM RS/6000. The POLY1 benchmark shows the Stardent ST2025 with the highest peak performance, followed by the IBM RS/6000 and then the i860. Of these three, the value for the IBM is best, and the Stardent quite low, but the value greater than one for the i860 shows that there is a severe memory bottleneck problem with this chip that will prevent it from getting close to its peak advertised performance on many problems. \section{Multi-Processor Benchmarks} \subsection{Communication Benchmarks: COMMS1 and COMMS2} The purpose of the COMMS1, or {\em Pingpong}, benchmark \cite{Hoc88,Hoc91} is to measure the basic communication properties of a message-passing MIMD computer. A message of variable length, $n$, is sent from a master node to a slave node. The slave node receives the message into a Fortran data array, and immediately returns it to the master. Half the time for this `pingpong' exchange is recorded as the time, $t$, to send a message of length, $n$. In the COMMS2 benchmark there is a message exchange in which two nodes simultaneously send messages to each other and return them. In this case advantage can be taken of bidirectional links, and a greater bandwidth obtained than is possible with COMMS1. In both benchmarks, the time as a function of message length is fitted by least squares using the parameters \rnhalf \cite{Hoc82,HoJe88} to the following linear timing model: \begin{equation} t = (n + \nhalf)/\rinf \label{Eqn(4.1)} \end{equation} when the average communication rate is given by \begin{equation} r = \frac {\rinf}{1+\nhalf/n} = \rinf \pipe (n/\nhalf) \label{Eqn(4.2)} \end{equation} \begin{equation} \where \spten \pipe (x) = \frac {1}{1 + 1/x} \end{equation} and the startup time is \begin{equation} t_0 = \nhalf/\rinf \label{Eqn(4.3)} \end{equation} In the above equations, \rinf is the {\em asymptotic bandwidth} of communication which is approached as the message length tends to infinity (hence the subscript), and \nhalf is the message length required to achieve half this asymptotic rate. Hence \nhalf is called the {\em half-performance message length}. The importance of the parameter \nhalf is that it provides a yardstick with which to measure message-length, and thereby enables one to distinquish the two regimes of short and long messages. For long messages $(n > \nhalf)$, the denominator in equation \ref{Eqn(4.2)} is approximately unity and the average communication rate is approximately constant at its asymptotic rate, \rinf \begin{equation} r \approx \rinf \label{Eqn(4.3.5)} \end{equation} For short messages $(n < \nhalf)$, the communication rate is best expressed in the algebraically equivalent form \begin{equation} r = \frac {\pi_0 n} {(1+ n/ \nhalf)} \label{Eqn(4.4)} \end{equation} \begin{equation} \where \spten \pi_0 = t_0 ^{-1} = \rinf/\nhalf \label{Eqn(4.5)} \end{equation} For short messages, the denominator in equation \ref{Eqn(4.4)} will be approximately unity, so that \begin{equation} r \approx \pi_0 n = n / t_0 \label{Eqn(4.6)} \end{equation} In sharp contrast to the approximately constant rate in the long-message limit, the communication rate in the short message limit is seen to be approximately proportional to the message length. The constant of proportionality, $\pi_0$, is known as the {\em specific performance}, and can be expressed conveniently in units of kilobyte per second per byte (kB/s)/B or k/s. Thus, in general, we may say that \rinf characterises the long-message performance and $\pi_0$ the short-message performance. The COMMS1 benchmark computes all four of the above parameters, $(\rinf, \nhalf, t_0, \rmand \pi_0)$, because each emphasises a different aspect of performance. However only two of them are independent. In the case that there are different modes of transmission for messages shorter or longer than a certain length, the benchmark can read in this breakpoint and perform a separate least-squares fit for the two regions. An example is the Intel iPSC/860 which has a different message protocol for messages shorter than and longer than 100 byte. Because of the finite (and often large) value of $t_0$, the above is a {\em two-parameter} description of communication performance. It is therefore incorrect, and sometimes positively misleading, to quote only one of the parameters (e.g. just \rinf, as is often done) to describe the performance. The most useful pairs of parameters are \rnhalf $(\pi_0,\nhalf)$ and $(t_0,\rinf)$, depending on whether one is concerned with long vectors, short vectors or a direct comparison with hardware times. Note also that, although \nhalf is defined as the message length required to obtain half the asymptotic rate \rinf, the two parameters \rnhalf are sufficient to calculate the average rate for any message length via equation \ref{Eqn(4.2)}, or equivalently using $\pi_0$ instead of \rinf via \ref{Eqn(4.4)}. The COMMS1 and COMMS2 benchmarks exist as part if the Genesis benchmarks v2.0 and 2.2.1 ~\cite{Hey91}. \subsection{Example Results for the COMMS1 benchmark} We report below results for the COMMS1 benchmark on the \Suprenum, and Intel iPSC/860 ~\cite{Hoc91} and Touchstone Delta ~\cite{HoCa92} computers. Table-\ref{Table4.1} gives the values obtained for the communication parameters, in the version of the benchmark using the native \Suprenum extensions to the Fortran90 language. These include a SEND and RECEIVE language statement with a syntax similar to that of the Fortran READ and WRITE statement. The asymptotic stream rate, or bandwidth, (\rinf) shows considerable variation on the Suprenum, depending on how the data to be transferred is specified in the I/O list of the SEND statement. A variable length array in Fortran90 syntax in single precision achieves 0.67 MB/s, whereas the same statement specified in double precision achieves 4.8 MB/s. This double-precision rate is about twice that observed on the iPSC/860 with their CSEND Fortran subroutine, which sends an array whose length is specified in bytes. The principal difference between the two computers is the magnitude of the startup time, $t_0$, which is $73\mu s$ on the iPSC/860 compared with about 3ms on the Suprenum. Since the startup time, via $\pi_0$, determines the transfer rate for short messages (say $<100$B), we see that the Suprenum is 45 times slower than the iPSC/860 for short messages. On the other hand the Suprenum has almost twice the stream rate for long messages (as seen by the value of \rinf), provided the most favourable format (i.e. double precision or 64-bit) is used in the I/O list. One may compute from these numbers that the iPSC/860 is faster at transferring messages for all message lengths less than 16,481 Byte. The longer startup time on Suprenum results in larger values of \nhalf, showing that longer messages are needed to achieve any given fraction of the asymptotic rate. The results for the Touchstone Delta show that this computer has the fastest short and long message performance, judged respectively by the values of $\pi_0$ and \rinf. However the improvement of short message performance over the iPSC/860 is only marginal, and the long message performance is only about one quarter of the advertised bandwidth of 25MB/s. However harware and software improvements made since the measurements were made should have improved the results. \begin{table} \centering {\small \parbox{3.5in}{ \caption{\label{Table4.1} Values of (\rinf,\nhalf) for the communication of messages between two nodes of the same cluster on the Suprenum and neighbouring nodes on the Intel iPSC/860 and Touchstone Delta computers. The Delta measurements were made on 17 Jan. 1992, and should have been improved by subsequent hardware and software changes.}} \begin{tabular}{llcccc} \hline Specification & Range & \rinf & \nhalf & $t_0$ & $\pi_0$ \\ & B* & MB/s & B & ms & k/s \\ \hline SUPRENUM \\ sp SEND A(1:N) & & 0.67 & 2041 & 3.05 & 0.328 \\ dp SEND A(1:N) & & 4.82 & 12740 & 2.64 & 0.378 \\ \hline INTEL iPSC/860 \\ CSEND (,A,N,,) & $N<100$ & 2.36 & 179 & 0.074 & 13.5 \\ & $N>100$ & 2.80 & 560 & 0.200 & 5.0 \\ \hline INTEL Delta \\ CSEND (,A,N,,) & $N<512$ & 3.48 & 213 & 0.061 & 16.3 \\ & $N>512$ & 6.76 & 892 & 0.132 & 7.57 \\ \hline * B - byte \end{tabular} } \end{table} % ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- \subsection{Total Saturation Bandwidth: COMMS3} To complement the above communication benchmarks, there is a need for a benchmark to measure the total saturation bandwidth of the complete communication system, and to see how this scales with the number of processors. A natural generalisation of the COMMS2 benchmark could be made as follows, and be called the COMMS3 benchmark: Each processor of a $p$-processor system send a message of length $n$ to the other $(p-1)$ processors. Each processor then waits to receive the $(p-1)$ messages directed at it. The timing of this generalised 'pingping' ends when all messages have been sucessfully received by all processors; although the process will be repeated many times to obtain an accurate measurement, and the overall time will be divided by the number of repeats. The time for the generalised pingping is the time to send $p(p-1)$ messages of length $n$ and can be analysed in the same way as COMMS1 and COMMS2 into values of \rnhalf. The value obtained for \rinf is the required total saturation bandwidth, and we are interested in how this scales up as the number of processors $p$ increases and with it the number of available links in the system. This benchmark does not exist, but Roger Hockney will develop a trial version for the Intel iPSC, followed by PARMACS and PVM. Perhaps suitable and better benchmarks exist elsewhere. Please send in your suggestions. \subsection{Communication Bottleneck: POLY3} POLY3 assesses the severity of the communication bottleneck. It is the same as the POLY1 benchmark except that the data for the polynomial evaluation is stored on a neighbouring processor. The value of \fhalf obtained therefore measures the ratio of arithmetic to communication performance. Equation ~\ref{Eqn3} shows that the computational intensity of the calculation must be significantly greater than \fhalf (say 4 times greater) if communication is not to be a bottleneck. In this case the computational intensity is the ratio of arithmetic performed on a processor to words tranferred to/from it over communication links. In the common case that the amount of arithmetic is proportional to the volume of a region, and the data communicated is proportional to the surface of the region, the computational intensity is increased as the size of the region (or granularity of the decomposition) is increased. Then the \fhalf obtained from this benchmark is directly related to the granularity that is required to make communication time unimportant. The POLY3 benchmark does not exist, although native versions have been used on transputer systems ~\cite{Hoc91}. A trial benchmark will be prepared for Intel iPSC computers by Roger Hockney, followed by PARMACS and PVM versions. \subsection{Synchronisation Benchmarks: SYNCH1} SYNCH1 measures the time to execute a barrier synchronisation statement as a function of the number of processes taking part in the barrier. The practicability of massively parallel computation with thousands or tens of thousands of processors depends on this barrier time not increasing too fast with the number of processors. The results are quoted both as a barrier time, and as the number of barrier statements executed per second (barr/s). The SYNCH1 benchmark exists as part of Genesis v2.0 and v2.1.1 ~\cite{Hey91}. \section{Summary of Benchmark Status} The following Table-\ref{Table3} summarises the current state of the proposed low-level benchmarks, and the properties they are intended to measure. \begin{table} \centering {\small \parbox{5in}{ \caption{\label{Table3} Status of proposed Low-Level benchmarks. Note we abbreviate performance (perf.), arithmetic (arith.), communication (comms.), operations (ops.).}} \begin{tabular}{llcccc} \hline Benchmark & Measures & Parameters & Exists & Author \\ & & & & \\ \hline SINGLE-PROCESSOR \\ TICK1 & Timer resolution & tick interval & Genesis & Hockney \\ TICK2 & Timer value & wall-clock check& Genesis & Hockney \\ LINPACKD100 & typical arith. perf. & job Mflop/s & Linpack & Dongarra \\ LIVERMORE & Arith. perf. range & loop Mflop/s & Livermore & McMahon \\ RINF1 & Basic Arith. ops. & \rnhalf & Genesis & Hockney \\ POLY1 & Cache-bottleneck & \rfhalf & EuroBen & Hockney \\ POLY2 & Memory-bottleneck & \rfhalf & Hockney & Hockney \\ \hline MULTI-PROCESSOR \\ COMMS1 & Basic Message perf. & \rnhalf & Genesis & Hockney \\ COMMS2 & Message exch. perf. & \rnhalf & Genesis & Hockney \\ COMMS3 & Saturation Bandwidth & \rnhalf & No & Hockney \\ POLY3 & Comms. Bottleneck & \rfhalf & No & Hockney \\ \hline \end{tabular} } \end{table} % ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-parkbench-lowlevel@CS.UTK.EDU Wed Aug 17 12:41:13 1994 Received: from CS.UTK.EDU by netlib2.cs.utk.edu with ESMTP (cf v2.8t-netlib) id MAA18664; Wed, 17 Aug 1994 12:41:13 -0400 Received: from localhost by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id MAA27760; Wed, 17 Aug 1994 12:40:56 -0400 X-Resent-To: parkbench-lowlevel@CS.UTK.EDU ; Wed, 17 Aug 1994 12:40:55 EDT Errors-to: owner-parkbench-lowlevel@CS.UTK.EDU Received: from ursa.cis.umassd.edu by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id MAA27746; Wed, 17 Aug 1994 12:40:49 -0400 Received: by ursa.cis.umassd.edu id AA19853 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for parkbench-lowlevel@cs.utk.edu); Wed, 17 Aug 1994 12:40:43 -0400 From: Ardsher Ahmed Message-Id: <199408171640.AA19853@ursa.cis.umassd.edu> Subject: send lowlevel.archive from parkbench To: parkbench-lowlevel@CS.UTK.EDU Date: Wed, 17 Aug 94 12:40:42 EDT X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11] send lowlevel.archive from parkbench From owner-parkbench-lowlevel@CS.UTK.EDU Fri Sep 8 16:37:08 1995 Return-Path: Received: from CS.UTK.EDU by netlib2.cs.utk.edu with ESMTP (cf v2.9t-netlib) id QAA14454; Fri, 8 Sep 1995 16:37:08 -0400 Received: from localhost by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id QAA04662; Fri, 8 Sep 1995 16:37:27 -0400 X-Resent-To: parkbench-lowlevel@CS.UTK.EDU ; Fri, 8 Sep 1995 16:37:25 EDT Errors-to: owner-parkbench-lowlevel@CS.UTK.EDU Received: from franklin.seas.gwu.edu by CS.UTK.EDU with ESMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id QAA04655; Fri, 8 Sep 1995 16:37:24 -0400 Received: from felix.seas.gwu.edu (abdullah@felix.seas.gwu.edu [128.164.9.3]) by franklin.seas.gwu.edu (v8) with ESMTP id QAA10191 for ; Fri, 8 Sep 1995 16:37:22 -0400 Received: (from abdullah@localhost) by felix.seas.gwu.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) id QAA07194 for parkbench-lowlevel@cs.utk.edu; Fri, 8 Sep 1995 16:37:18 -0400 Date: Fri, 8 Sep 1995 16:37:18 -0400 From: Abdullah Meajil Message-Id: <199509082037.QAA07194@felix.seas.gwu.edu> To: parkbench-lowlevel@CS.UTK.EDU Subject: subscribe subscribe From owner-parkbench-comm@CS.UTK.EDU Fri May 2 15:53:02 1997 Return-Path: Received: from CS.UTK.EDU by netlib2.cs.utk.edu with ESMTP (cf v2.9t-netlib) id PAA00358; Fri, 2 May 1997 15:53:02 -0400 Received: from localhost (root@localhost) by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id PAA13341; Fri, 2 May 1997 15:44:43 -0400 Received: from blueberry.cs.utk.edu (BLUEBERRY.CS.UTK.EDU [128.169.92.34]) by CS.UTK.EDU with ESMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id PAA13327; Fri, 2 May 1997 15:44:36 -0400 Received: by blueberry.cs.utk.edu (cf v2.11c-UTK) id TAA08348; Fri, 2 May 1997 19:44:04 GMT From: "Erich Strohmaier" Message-Id: <9705021544.ZM8346@blueberry.cs.utk.edu> Date: Fri, 2 May 1997 15:44:03 -0400 X-Face: ,v?vp%=2zU8m.23T00H*9+qjCVLwK{V3T{?1^Bua(Ud:|%?@D!~^v^hoA@Z5/*TU[RFq_n'n"}z{qhQ^Q3'Mexsxg0XW>+CbEOca91voac=P/w]>n_nS]V_ZL>XRSYWi:{MzalK9Hb^=B}Y*[x*MOX7R=*V}PI.HG~2 X-Mailer: Z-Mail (3.2.0 26oct94 MediaMail) To: parkbench-comm@CS.UTK.EDU Subject: ParkBench Committee Meeting Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Dear Colleague, Here is the revised agenda. Please send me ASAP a short email if you come so that we can arrange for a meeting room. ------------------- The ParkBench (Parallel Benchmark Working Group) will meet in Knoxville, Tennessee on May 9th, 1997. The meeting site will be the Knoxville Downtown Hilton Hotel. We have made arrangements with the Hilton Hotel in Knoxville. Hilton Hotel 501 W. Church Street Knoxville, TN Phone: 423-523-2300 When making arrangements tell the hotel you are associated with the 'ParkBench'. The rate about $79.00/night. You can download a postscript map of the area by looking at http://www.netlib.org/utk/people/JackDongarra.html. ---------------- The tentative agenda for the meeting is: 1. Minutes of last meeting (MBe) Changes to Current release: 2. Low Level (ES, VG, RS) comms1, comms2, comms3, poly2 3. Linear Algebra (ES) 4. Compact Applications - NPBs (SS, ES) New benchmarks: 5. HPF Low Level benchmarks (MBa) 6. Java Low-Level Benchmarks (VG) 7. New I/O benchmark benchmarks (MBa) 8. New performance database design and new benchmark output format Update of GBIS with new Web front-end (MBa,TH) Report from other benchmark activities 9. ASCI Benchmark Codes (AH) 10. SPEC-HPG (RE, JD) ParkBench: 11. ParkBench Bibliography 12. ParkBench Report 2 Other Activities: 13. Discussion of the ParkBench Workshop 11/12 September, UK (TH, MBa) 14. PEMCS - "Electronic Benchmarking Journal" - status report - (TH, MBa) 15. Status of Funding proposals (JD, TH) 15. Miscellaneous - 16. Date and venue for next meeting - (MBa) Mark Baker Univ. of Portsmouth (MBe) Michael Berry Univ. of Tennessee (JD) Jack Dongarra Univ. of Tenn./ORNL (RE) Rudi Eigenmann SPEC (VG) Vladimir Getov Univ. of Westminister (TH) Tony Hey Univ. of Southampton (AH) Adolfy Hoisie LLNL (SS) Subhash Saini NASA Ames (RS) Ron Sercely HP/CXTC (ES) Erich Strohmaier Univ. of Tennessee Jack Dongarra Erich Strohmaier From owner-parkbench-comm@CS.UTK.EDU Tue May 6 14:46:45 1997 Return-Path: Received: from CS.UTK.EDU by netlib2.cs.utk.edu with ESMTP (cf v2.9t-netlib) id OAA04480; Tue, 6 May 1997 14:46:45 -0400 Received: from localhost (root@localhost) by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id OAA25737; Tue, 6 May 1997 14:34:05 -0400 Received: from punt-2.mail.demon.net (relay-11.mail.demon.net [194.217.242.137]) by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id OAA25715; Tue, 6 May 1997 14:33:58 -0400 Received: from minnow.demon.co.uk ([158.152.73.63]) by punt-2.mail.demon.net id aa1000641; 6 May 97 19:07 BST Message-ID: Date: Tue, 6 May 1997 19:06:15 +0100 To: parkbench-comm@CS.UTK.EDU From: Roger Hockney Subject: Parkbench Meeting Documents In-Reply-To: <9705021544.ZM8346@blueberry.cs.utk.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Turnpike Version 3.01 AGENDA ITEM: > Changes to Current release: > 2. Low Level (VG) > comms1, comms2, Two documents will be submitted to the committee on this item by Roger Hockney and Vladimir Getov (Westminster University, UK). They can be downloaded as postscript files from: "New COMMS1 Benchmark: Results and Recommendations" http://www.minow.demon.co.uk/Pbench/comms1/PBPAPER2.PS "New COMMS1 Benchmark: The Details" http://www.minow.demon.co.uk/Pbench/comms1/PBPAPER3.PS The papers will be presented by Vladimir who will bring some paper copies with him. Best wishes Roger and Vladimir -- Roger Hockney. Checkout my new Web page at URL http://www.minnow.demon.co.uk University of and link to my new book: "The Science of Computer Benchmarking" Westminster UK suggestions welcome. Know any fish movies or suitable links? From owner-parkbench-comm@CS.UTK.EDU Tue May 6 17:54:47 1997 Return-Path: Received: from CS.UTK.EDU by netlib2.cs.utk.edu with ESMTP (cf v2.9t-netlib) id RAA07526; Tue, 6 May 1997 17:54:46 -0400 Received: from localhost (root@localhost) by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id RAA17012; Tue, 6 May 1997 17:48:50 -0400 Received: from punt-1.mail.demon.net (relay-7.mail.demon.net [194.217.242.9]) by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id RAA17003; Tue, 6 May 1997 17:48:47 -0400 Received: from minnow.demon.co.uk ([158.152.73.63]) by punt-1.mail.demon.net id aa0623986; 6 May 97 21:37 BST Message-ID: Date: Tue, 6 May 1997 21:26:50 +0100 To: parkbench-comm@CS.UTK.EDU From: Roger Hockney Subject: Parkbench Meeting Documents (Correction) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Turnpike Version 3.01 I am resending this because there was a typo in the URLs: There are two MM in "minnow". Also if you took PBPAPER2.PS before receiving this repeat message, please take it again as I have corrected two errors in the graphs. SORRY Roger ************************ AGENDA ITEM: > Changes to Current release: > 2. Low Level (VG) > comms1, comms2, Two documents will be submitted to the committee on this item by Roger Hockney and Vladimir Getov (Westminster University, UK). They can be downloaded as postscript files from: CORRECTED URLs: "New COMMS1 Benchmark: Results and Recommendations" http://www.minnow.demon.co.uk/Pbench/comms1/PBPAPER2.PS "New COMMS1 Benchmark: The Details" http://www.minnow.demon.co.uk/Pbench/comms1/PBPAPER3.PS The papers will be presented by Vladimir who will bring some paper copies with him. Best wishes Roger and Vladimir -- -- Roger Hockney. Checkout my new Web page at URL http://www.minnow.demon.co.uk University of and link to my new book: "The Science of Computer Benchmarking" Westminster UK suggestions welcome. Know any fish movies or suitable links? From owner-parkbench-comm@CS.UTK.EDU Mon May 12 05:36:41 1997 Return-Path: Received: from CS.UTK.EDU by netlib2.cs.utk.edu with ESMTP (cf v2.9t-netlib) id FAA24086; Mon, 12 May 1997 05:36:41 -0400 Received: from localhost (root@localhost) by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id FAA10068; Mon, 12 May 1997 05:18:21 -0400 Received: from haven.EPM.ORNL.GOV (haven.epm.ornl.gov [134.167.12.69]) by CS.UTK.EDU with ESMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id FAA10051; Mon, 12 May 1997 05:18:18 -0400 Received: (from worley@localhost) by haven.EPM.ORNL.GOV (8.8.3/8.8.3) id FAA29262; Mon, 12 May 1997 05:18:16 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 12 May 1997 05:18:16 -0400 (EDT) From: Pat Worley Message-Id: <199705120918.FAA29262@haven.EPM.ORNL.GOV> To: parkbench-comm@CS.UTK.EDU Subject: Gordon Conference on HPC and NII Forwarding: Mail from 'Tony Skjellum ' dated: Sat, 10 May 1997 16:32:12 -0500 (CDT) Cc: worley@haven.EPM.ORNL.GOV Just in case you haven't received information on this already, here is a blurb on the 1997 Gordon conference in high performance computing. Unlike previous years, there is not an explicit emphasis on performance evaluation in this year's stated themes, but you can't (shouldn't) discuss future architectures and their impacts without discussing how to evaluate performance, and I am hoping that some benchmarking-minded people will show up and keep the discussion honest. ---------- Begin Forwarded Message ---------- The deadline for applying to attend the 1997 Gordon conference in high performance computing is June 1. If you are interested in attending, please apply as soon as possible. The simplest way to apply is to download the application form from the web site indicated below, or to use the online registration option. If you have any problems with either of these, please contact the organizers at tony@cs.msstate.edu and worleyph@ornl.gov. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The 1997 Gordon Conference on High Performance Computing and Information Infrastructure: "Practical Revolutions in HPC and NII" Chair, Anthony Skjellum, Mississippi State University, tony@cs.msstate.edu, 601-325-8435 Co-Chair, Pat Worley, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, worleyph@ornl.gov, 615-574-3128 Conference web page: http://www.erc.msstate.edu/conferences/gordon97 July 13-17, 1997 Plymouth State College Plymouth NH The now bi-annual Gordon conference series in HPC and NII commenced in 1992 and has had its second meeting in 1995. The Gordon conferences are an elite series of conferences designed to advance the state-of-the-art in covered disciplines. Speakers are assured of anonymity and referencing presentations done at Gordon conferences is prohibited by conference rules in order to promote science, rather than publication lists. Previous meetings have had good international participation, and this is always encouraged. Experts, novices, and technically interested parties from other fields interested in HPC and NII are encouraged to apply to attend. All attendees, including speakers, poster presenters, and session chairs must apply to attend. We *strongly* encourage all poster presenters to have their poster proposals in by May 13, 1997, though we will consider poster presentations up to six weeks prior to the conference. Application to attend the conference is also six weeks in advance. More information on the conference can be found at the web page listed above, including the list of speakers and poster presenters and information on applying for attendance. ----------- End Forwarded Message ----------- From owner-parkbench-comm@CS.UTK.EDU Tue May 13 13:58:00 1997 Return-Path: Received: from CS.UTK.EDU by netlib2.cs.utk.edu with ESMTP (cf v2.9t-netlib) id NAA20879; Tue, 13 May 1997 13:57:59 -0400 Received: from localhost (root@localhost) by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id NAA11997; Tue, 13 May 1997 13:33:14 -0400 Received: from timbuk.cray.com (timbuk-fddi.cray.com [128.162.8.102]) by CS.UTK.EDU with ESMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id NAA11983; Tue, 13 May 1997 13:33:10 -0400 Received: from ironwood.cray.com (root@ironwood-fddi.cray.com [128.162.21.36]) by timbuk.cray.com (8.8.5/CRI-gate-news-1.3) with ESMTP id MAA20939 for ; Tue, 13 May 1997 12:33:07 -0500 (CDT) Received: from magnet.cray.com (magnet [128.162.173.162]) by ironwood.cray.com (8.8.4/CRI-ironwood-news-1.0) with ESMTP id MAA16428 for ; Tue, 13 May 1997 12:33:06 -0500 (CDT) From: Charles Grassl Received: by magnet.cray.com (8.8.0/btd-b3) id RAA20181; Tue, 13 May 1997 17:33:04 GMT Message-Id: <199705131733.RAA20181@magnet.cray.com> Subject: Parkbench directions To: parkbench-comm@CS.UTK.EDU Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 12:33:04 -0500 (CDT) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24-CRI-d] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: ParkBench Group From: Charles Grassl Date: May 13, 1997 (Long) I appreciated the meeting this past week and wish to thank Eric and Jack for hosting it. I am aware of the great effort of many individuals have contributed to developing and implementing the ParkBench suite. In spite of this, I feel that we need to evaluate and correct our course. ParkBench should not merge with or use benchmarks from the SPEC/HPG (High Performance Group) group. SGI/Cray and IBM have already withdrawn from the SPEC/HPG group and Fujitsu and NEC are no longer participating. The reasons for these companies and other institutions no longer participating should indicate to us (ParkBench) that something is amiss with the SPEC/HPG benchmarks and paradigm. Several of the reasons for the supercomputer manufacturers not supporting the SPEC/HPG effort are listed below. I list these reasons so that the ParkBench group can learn from them and avoid the same problems. - Relevance. The particular benchmark programs being used by SPEC/HPG are not relevant or appropriate for supercomputing. The programs in the current SPEC/HPG suite do not represent any leading edge software which is more typical of usage for high performance systems. - Redundancy. The programs being developed by SPEC/HPG are not qualitatively or quantitatively different from the SPEC/OSG programs and as such, it is viewed as redundant and expensive. - Methodology. The methodology being used by SPEC/HPG to procure, develop and run benchmarks lacks scientific and technical basis and hence results have a vague and arbitrary interpretation. - Programming model. Designing benchmarks for portability across systems is a convenient idea but does not reflect actual constraints or usage. More often than not, compatibility with a PREVIOUS model of computer is more important than compatibility ACROSS computers. - Expense. Some of the large data cases for the SPEC/HPG programs will requires hours or days to run with little new data or information gained by the exercise. These exercises are extremely expensive both in time and capital equipment and in logistics. - Ergonomics. The cumbersome design of SPEC/HPG Makefiles and build procedures make the programs difficult and expensive to test, maintain and analyze. We in the ParkBench group must acknowledge the above items if we are to maintain interest and participation from computer vendors. I believe that reorganizing and refocusing the group could revitalize high performance computer benchmarking and and re-invigorate the ParkBench group. As the ParkBench suite now stands, there are too many programs and they are difficult to build, test and maintain. This situation impedes usage and participation. Here are a few suggestions for our future practices and directions: - Design and write benchmarks programs. Don't borrow or solicit old code. The borrowed or solicited code is never quite appropriate and usually obsolete. Our greatest asset is that we have scientist who are capable of designing experiments (benchmarks). (Build value.) - Monitor and evaluate accuracy. Though we mention accuracy in ParkBench Report 1, we haven't applied it to the current programs (Scientifically validate, or invalidate, our experiments.) - Make it simple. Write and develop simple programs which do not need elaborate build procedures and which easier to test and to maintain. (Keep It Simple, Stupid.) - Build a better user interface. The belabored "run rules" and the interface with layers of Makefiles, includes and embedded relative file paths is unacceptable. An acceptable interface might require binary distribution and hence a desirable emphasis on designing and running rather than building and porting the benchmarks. (Make the product more attractive to more users.) - Make the suite truly modular. The current structure makes the simplest one CPU program as difficult to build and run as the most complicated program with Makefile includes, special compilers, source file includes, special libraries, suite libraries, etc. (Make it manageable.) - Drop the connection with SPEC/HPG and with NPB. This "grand unifying" scheme make redundant code. It has had the opposite effect of focusing benchmarking attention on ParkBench because it is yet another collection of benchmarks used by other organizations. (Be distinguishable and identifiable.) - Emphasis what ParkBench is associated with: benchmarking distributed memory parallel computers. We should write and develop benchmark programs which measure and instrument the parallel processing aspect of MPP systems. (Keep our focus.) I volunteer to develop and write a suite of message passing test programs which measure the performance and variance of message passing communication schemes. I have much experience with writing such a programs and believe that such suite would be useful for others and for the computer industry in general. I hesitate to contribute such programs to the present structure for several reasons: - The network test suite does not logically fit into the current "hierarchy" and hence might further clutter the ParkBench suite and make it further unfocused. - The current ParkBench structure is not manageable. Testing and maintenance would be extremely expensive in the current structure. - My company's effort may be interpreted as an endorsement of the current structure and model. The suite is not popular with vendors for reasons outlined above. Participation is currently discouraged. Discussion? Regards, Charles Grassl SGI/Cray Eagan, Minnesota USA From owner-parkbench-comm@CS.UTK.EDU Wed May 21 17:25:15 1997 Return-Path: Received: from CS.UTK.EDU by netlib2.cs.utk.edu with ESMTP (cf v2.9t-netlib) id RAA27513; Wed, 21 May 1997 17:25:15 -0400 Received: from localhost (root@localhost) by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id RAA07579; Wed, 21 May 1997 17:18:07 -0400 Received: from rastaman.rmt.utk.edu (root@TCHM11A6.RMT.UTK.EDU [128.169.27.188]) by CS.UTK.EDU with ESMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id RAA07571; Wed, 21 May 1997 17:18:02 -0400 Received: from rastaman.rmt.utk.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rastaman.rmt.utk.edu (8.7.6/8.7.3) with SMTP id RAA01108; Wed, 21 May 1997 17:24:43 -0400 Sender: mucci@CS.UTK.EDU Message-ID: <3383681A.D98C5FB@cs.utk.edu> Date: Wed, 21 May 1997 17:24:42 -0400 From: "Philip J. Mucci" Organization: University of Tennessee, Knoxville X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (X11; I; Linux 2.0.28 i586) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: parkbench-comm@CS.UTK.EDU CC: "PVM Developer's Mailing List" Subject: Mesg Passing Benchmarks References: <199705131733.RAA20181@magnet.cray.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi all, Charles Grassl in his last message to this committee volunteered to write a suite of message passing benchmarks to replace the Low Levels...Before any action on his or this committee's part, I would recommend that you all have a look at version 3 of my pvmbench package. It now does MPI as well and can easily support other message passing primitives with a few #defines. Version 3 along with some sample results can be found at http://www.cs.utk.edu/~mucci/pvmbench. Note that this has not been tested on any MPP's with UTK PVM. This benchmark will generate and graph the following: bandwidth gap time (to buffer an outgoing message) roundtrip (latency /2) barrier/sec broadcast summation reduction Other tests can easily be added...I would highly recommend before any action done that this code be examined. It is less than a year old, version 3 available on that page is in beta, i.e. it has not been released to the general public. Let me know what you think... -Phil -- /%*\ Philip J. Mucci | GRA in CS under Dr. JJ Dongarra /*%\ \*%/ http://www.cs.utk.edu/~mucci PVM/Active Messages \%*/ From owner-parkbench-comm@CS.UTK.EDU Fri May 23 12:03:04 1997 Return-Path: Received: from CS.UTK.EDU by netlib2.cs.utk.edu with ESMTP (cf v2.9t-netlib) id MAA06549; Fri, 23 May 1997 12:03:03 -0400 Received: from localhost (root@localhost) by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id LAA15901; Fri, 23 May 1997 11:05:32 -0400 Received: from berry.cs.utk.edu (BERRY.CS.UTK.EDU [128.169.94.70]) by CS.UTK.EDU with ESMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id LAA15895; Fri, 23 May 1997 11:05:30 -0400 Received: from cs.utk.edu by berry.cs.utk.edu with ESMTP (cf v2.11c-UTK) id LAA01370; Fri, 23 May 1997 11:05:31 -0400 Message-Id: <199705231505.LAA01370@berry.cs.utk.edu> to: parkbench-comm@CS.UTK.EDU Subject: Minutes of May ParkBench Meeting Date: Fri, 23 May 1997 11:05:31 -0400 From: "Michael W. Berry" Here are the minutes from the recent ParkBench meeting in Knoxville. Best regards, Mike ----------------------------------------------------------------- Minutes of ParkBench Meeting - Knoxville Hilton, May 9, 1997 ----------------------------------------------------------------- ParkBench Attendee List: (MBa) Mark Baker Univ. of Portsmouth mab@sis.port.ac.uk (MBe) Michael Berry Univ. of Tennessee berry@cs.utk.edu Shirley Browne Univ. of Tennessee browne@cs.utk.edu (JD) Jack Dongarra Univ. of Tenn./ORNL dongarra@cs.utk.edu Jeff Durachta Army Res. Lab MSRC durachta@arl.mil (VG) Vladimir Getov Univ. of Westminister getovv@wmin.ac.uk (CG) Charles Grassl SGI/Cray cmg@cray.com (TH) Tony Hey Univ. of Southampton ajgh@ecs.soton.ac.uk (AH) Adolfy Hoisie Los Alamos Nat'l Lab hoisie@lanl.gov (CK) Charles Koelbel Rice University chk@cs.rice.edu (PM) Phil Mucci Univ. of Tennessee mucci@cs.utk.edu Erik Riedel GENIAS Software GmbH erik@genias.de (SS) Subhash Saini NASA Ames saini@nas.nasa.gov (RS) Ron Sercely HP-Convex sercely@convex.hp.com Alan Stagg CEWES stagga@wes.army.mil (ES) Erich Strohmaier Univ. of Tennessee erich@cs.utk.edu (PW) Pat Worley Oak Ridge Nat'l Lab worleyph@ornl.gov SPEC-HPG Visitors: Don Dossa DEC dossa@eng.pko.dec.com (RE) Rudi Eigenmann Purdue University eigenman@ecn.purdue.edu Greg Gaertner DEC ggg@zko.dec.com Jean Suplick HP suplick@rsn.hp.com Joe Throp Kuck & Associates throp@kai.com At 9:05am EST, TH opened the meeting and ask that all the attendees introduce themselves. After a brief overview of the proposed agenda, MBe reviewed the minutes from the last ParkBench meeting in October of '96. The minutes were unanimously accepted and TH asked VG to present the proposed changes to the low-level benchmarks (9:20am). VG reviewed the original COMMS1 (ping-pong or simplex communication) and the COMMS2 (duplex communication) low-level benchmarks. He discussed some of the problems with the previous versions. These included the omission of calculated bandwidth, large message length problems, and large errors in the asymptotic fit. In collaboration with RS and CG, a number of improvements have been made to these benchmarks: 1. Measured bandwidth is provided in output. 2. Time for shortest message is provided. 3. Maximum measured bandwidth and the corresponding message length is now provided. 4. The accuracy of the least-squares 2-parameter fit has been improved (sum of squares of the "relative" and not absolute error is now used). 5. New 3-parameter variable-power fit for certain cases added. 6. Can report parametric fits if the error is less than some user-specified tolerance. 7. Introduce KDIAG parameter to invoke diagnostic outputs. 8. Modifications fo ESTCOM.f (as suggested by RS). CG pointed out that it may not always be possible to interpret zero-length messages for these codes. On the Cray machines, such messages force an immediate return (i.e., no synchronization). He proposed that allowing zero- length messages be removed for the COMMS benchmarks. RS showed an actual COMMS1 performance graph demonstrating the difficulty of data extrapolation (if used to get latency for zero-length message-passing). RS pointed out, however, that zero-length message are defined w/in MPI, and suggested that a simple return (as in the case of Cray machines) is not standard. VG displayed some of the observed COMMS1/2 performance obtained on the Cray T3E. The 3-parameter fit yielded a 7% relative error for messages ranging from 8 to 1.E+7 bytes. CG questioned how the breakpoints were determined? He indicated the input parameters to the program required previous knowledge of where breakpoints occur (although implementations could change constantly). TH suggested that the parametric fitting should not be the default for these benchmarks, i.e., separate the analysis from the actual benchmarking (this concept was seconded by CG). RS suggested that the fitting routines could be placed on the WWW/Internet and the COMMS1/2 codes simply produce data. CK, however, stressed that the codes should maintain some minimal parametric fitting for clarity and consistency of output interpretations. The minimal message length shown for the T3E results shown by VG was 8 and the corresponding minimal message length for a Convex CXD set of COMMS benchmarks was 1. The lack of similar ranges of messages could pose problems for comparisons. JD strongly felt that users will return to the notion of "latency" and want zero-length message overheads. Users may be primarily interested in start-up time for message-passing. RS pointed out that MPI does process zero-length messages. JD suggested that the minimal message length for the COMMS benchmarks be 8 bytes and RS proposed that the minimal message-passing time and corresp. message length be an output. After more discussion, the following COMMS changes/outputs were unanimously agreed upon: 1. Maximum bandwidth with corresp. message size. 2. Minimum message-passing time with corresp. message size. 3. Time for minimum message length (could be 0, 1, 8, or 32 bytes but must be specified). 4. The software will be split into two program: one to report the spot measurements and the other for the analysis. At 10:00 am, SPEC-HPG members joined the ParkBench meeting for a joint session. CK reviewed the DoD Modernization Program. He indicated that the program is based on 3 primary components: 1. CHSSI (Commonly Highly Scalable Software Initiative) 2. DREN (Defense Research & Engineering Network) 3. Shared Resource Centers (4 Major Shared Resource Centers or MSRC's and 20 Distributed Centers or DC's) Benchmarking is part of the mission of the MSRC's, especially for system integration and the Programming Environment & Training (PET) team. CK mentioned that the resources available at the MSRC's include: 256-proc. Cray T3E, SGI Power Challenge (CEWES), 256 proc. IBM SP/2 and SGI Origin 2000 at ASC, SGI 790 at NAVO, and a collection of {SGI Origin, Cray Titan, J90} at the Army Research Lab. The benchmarking needs of the DoD program can be categorized as either contractual or training. The contractual needs are specified as PL1 (evaluation of initial machines), PL2 (upgrade to gain 3 times the performance of PL1), and PL3 (upgrade to gain 10 times the performance of PL1). CK mentioned that the MSRC's are planning for the PL2 phase later this year with PL3 scheduled in approx. 3 years. The training needs include: the evaluation of programming paradigms, the evaluation of performance trade-offs, templates for designing new codes, and benchmarks for training examples. The contractual benchmarks comprise 30 benchmarks (22 programs) some of which are export-controlled or proprietary (data may not be used in the public domain in some cases). The run rules specify the number of iterations for each benchmark in the suite. Each MSRC uses a different number of iterations per benchmark. Code modifications are allowed (parallel directives and message-passing can be used but no assembler) and algorithm substitutions are permitted provided the problem does not become specialized. The only performance metric reported for these benchmarks is the elapsed time for the entire suite. Benchmarks can be upgraded to reflect current workloads of the MSRCs but they must be compared head-to-head with previous systems. Example codes included in the DoD benchmark suite include: CTH (finite volume shock simulation), X3D (explicit finite element code), OCEAN-O2 (an ocean modeling code), NIKE3D (implicit nonlinear 3D FEM), and Aggregate I/O benchmark. Planned benchmarking activites for the DoD Modernization Program include: 1. benchmarks for evaluating programming techniques (determine what works; develop decision trees) 2. benchmarks for teaching (classes on "worked" examples; template modification) This effort currently has 1 FTE and over 50 University personnel (in PET program) involved (although they are not primarily responsible for benchmarking work). At 10:35am, TH asked AH from Los Alamos Nat'l Lab to overview their ASCI benchmark suite. He began by pointing out that these codes formulate the "Los Alamos set of" ASCI Benchmarks. Before presenting the list of codes, AH noted that the philosophy of this activity was to achieve "experiment ahead" capability especially with immature computing platforms. Los Alamos is also interested in developing performance modes as well as kernels. The list of active/research codes and compact applications comprising this suite are: Code Language(s) Parallelism Description *HEAT(RAGE) f77, f90 MPI(f90) Eulerian adaptive mesh MPIfSM(f77) refinement based on Riemann solvers; coupled physics-CFD; particle & radiative transport EULER f90 MPI Admissable fluid (for SIMD); SIMD(SP unstructured mesh, explicit vector) solution; high-speed fluids; SP=single processor NEUT f77 MPI,SM, Monte-Carlo, particle SHMEM SWEEP3D f90 MPI, SHMEM Inner/outer iteration (kernel) (compact application) HYDRO(T) f77 Serial (compact application) TBON f77 MPI Material science; quantum mechanics; polymer age simulation *TECOLOTE C++ MPI Mixed call hydro. with regular structured grid *TELURIDE f90 MPI Casting simulation; irregular structured grid; Krylov solution methods *DANTE HPF MPI * = export controlled The codes and compact apps above vary in size from 2,000 to 35,000 lines. AK noted that LANL could provide support for future ASCI-based ParkBench codes. The ASCI benchmark suite presented might include in the future tri-lab (Livermore, Sandia, Los Alamos) contributions. The ASCI application suite can be set up with data sets leading to varying run-times. AH mentioned that Los Alamos' ASCI benchmarking efforts are focused on high performance computing, leading edge architectures, algorithms, and applications. They are particularly concentrating in developing expertise in distributed shared-memory performance evaluation and modeling. AH expressed the hope that the efforts of ParkBench will follow similar directions. At 11:05am, SS reviewed some of the most recent NAS Parallel Benchmarks results. He began with vendor-optimized CG Class B results using row and column distribution blocking. Results for different numbers of processors of the T3D were reported along with results for the NEC SX-4, SGI Origin 2K, Convex SPP2K, Fujitsu VPP700, and IBM P2SC. He also showed results for FT Class B and BT Class B (all machines reported performed well on this benchmark). For BT, it was pointed out that 4 of the machines (Cray T3E, DEC Alpha, IBM P2SC, and NEC SX-4) essentially are based on the same processor but achieve widely-varying results. SS also reported HPF Class A MG results on 16 processors of the IBM SP2. The HPF version (APR-HPF/Portland Group compiled) was only 3 times slower than the MPI-based (f77) implementation. This is indeed a significant result given that two years ago the HPF version was as much as 10 times slower than the comparable MPI version. An HPF version of the Class A FT benchmark on 64 processors was shown to be faster than the MPI version (1.6 times faster) when optimized libraries are used in both versions. For the Class A SP benchmark (on 64 processors of the SP/2), the APR- and PGI-compiled HPF versions were within a factor of 2 of the MPI versions. Finally, the HPF Class A BT code on 64 processors of the Cray T3D was within a factor of 0.5 of the MPI version. At 11:35am, TH invited RE to overview current SPEC-HPG activities. The SPEC-HPG benchmarks define a suite of real-world high-performance computing applications designed for comparisons across different platforms (serial and message- passing). RE pointed out the history of the SPEC-HPG effort as a merger between the PERFECT and SPEC benchmarking activities. The current SPEC-HPG suite is comprised of 2 codes: SPECchem96 and SPECseis96. The SPECchem96 code evolved from the GAMES code used in pharmaceutical and chemical industries. It comprises 109,389 lines of f77 (21% comments), 865 subroutines and functions. The wave functions are written to disk. The SPECseis96 code is derived from the ARCO benchmark suite which consists of four phases: data generation, stack data, time migration, and depth migration. This code decomposes the domain into n equal parts (for n processors) with each part processed independently. It is have over 15K lines of code made up of 230 Fortran subroutines and 199 C functions for I/O and systems utilities. SPECseis96 uses 32-bit precision, FFT's, Kirchoff integrals, and finite differences. The very first set of SPEC-HPG benchmark results were approved on May 8, 1997 (preceding day). New benchmarks being considered are PMD (Parallel Molecular Dynamics) and MM5 (NCAR Weather Processing C code). The decision on whether or not to accept these two potential SPEC-HPG codes will be made in about 5 months. The SPEC-HPG run rules permit the use of compiler switches, source code changes, optimized libraries (which have been disclosed to customers). Only approved algorithmic changes will be disclosed. RE gave the URL for the SPEC-HPG effort: http://www.specbench.org/hpg. He also referred to a recent article by himself and S. Hassanzadeh in "IEEE Computational Science & Engineering" and two email reflectors for SPEC-HPG communication: comments@specbench.org and info@specbench.org. JD then gave a brief history of ParkBench and SPEC-HPG interactions and suggested that the two efforts might consider sharing results and software. The biggest difference in the two efforts is in the availability of software as ParkBench code is freely available and SPEC-HPG software has some restrictions. A forum to publish both sets of results was discussed and it was agreed that both efforts should at least share links on their respective webpages. RE pointed out that anyone can get the SPEC-HPG CD of benchmarks without actually being a SPEC member. JD stressed that the process of running codes (for any suite) needs to be simplified so that building executables for different platforms is not problematic. Modifications for porting should be restricted to driver programs. RS indicated that he has Perl scripts that runs all low_level, including COMMS3 for 2 to N procs, and produces a summary of the results. *** ACTION ITEM *** JD, RE, AH, and CK will discuss a potential joint effort to simplify the running of benchmark codes (contact RS also about his Perl scripts). MBa noted that the SPEC-HPG members should be added to the ParkBench email list (parkbench-comm@cs.utk.edu). He also indicated that European benchmarking workshop scheduled next Fall might coordinate with the European SPEC group (scheduled for Sept. 11-12). At 12:10pm, the attendees went to the lunch (Soup Kitchen). After lunch (1:30pm), TH asked ES and VG to coordinate changes to the COMMS benchmarks discussed above (*** ACTION ITEM ***). ES then discussed modifications to poly2 for the ParkBench V2.2 suite. The proposed changes include 1. enlarged arrays A(1000000), B(1000000) 2. removal of arrays C and D 3. avoid cache flush (use a sliding vector), i.e., DO I=1,N DO I=NMIN,NMAX becomes ... NMIN=NMIN+N+INC where INC=17 by default (avoids reuse of the old cache line). PM then discussed a program for determining parameters for memory subsystems. Characteristics of this software include the use of tight loops, independent memory references, maximized register use. He showed graphs of memory hierarchy bandwidth (reads and writes) depicting memory size (ranging from 4Kb to 4Mb) versus Mb/sec transfer rates. Some curves illustrated the effective cache size quite well. PM pointed out that dynamically-scheduled processors pose a significant problem for this type of modeling. The program can be run with or without a calibration loop exploiting known memory transfer data. CG suggested that it would be nice to have such a program to measure latency at all levels of the hierarchy. PM's webpages for this program are: http://www.cs.utk.edu/~mucci/cachebench and http://www.cs.utk.edu/~mucci/parkbench. CK suggested that an uncalibrated version of PM's benchmark would be more useful to users (more reflective of real codes). JD pointed out that the output of the program could be tabulated bandwidths, latencies, etc. CG felt this program would be a very useful tool. PM noted that the calibration will not be used by default. TH suggested that the ParkBench effort might want to develop a future "ParkBench Tool Set" which contains progams like this one developed by PM. With regard to the Linalg Kernels, ES noted that although many of the routines have calls to Scalapack routines, Scalapack will not be included in future software releases. Users will have to ge their own copies of the source (or binaries) for Scalapack. The size of these particular kernel benchmarks drops by a factor of one-third by removing Scalapack. *** ACTION ITEM *** ES will report the most recent Linalg benchmark performance results at the next ParkBench meeting. TH then asked for discussions on new benchmarks with MBa leading the discussion on HPF benchmarks. MBa indicated that a new mail reflector (parkbench-hpf@cs.utk.edu) had been set up for this cause with himself as moderator for low-level codes (CK will moderate kernels and SS will moderate discussions on HPF compact applications). MBa noted that there is limited manpower for the HPF benchmarking activities. CK noted that he had discussed this effort at recent the HPFF meeting (and other users meetings). A draft document on the ParkBench HPF benchmarks is available at http://www.sis.port.ac.uk/~mab/ParkBench. MBa felt strongly that without manpower support this particular activity will die and that a lead site is needed. *** ACTION ITEM *** CK and SS will investigate interest in HPF compact application development. JD indicated that wrappers are being used to create HPF versions of the Linalg kernels. The procedure involves writing wrappers for the current Scalapack driver programs. Eventually, these programs may be completely rewritten in HPF (this will start in the summer). TH suggested that HPF kernel benchmark performance be reported at the ParkBench meeting in September (at Southampton Performance Workshop). MBa went on to report on the status of I/O benchmarks. Basically, not much progress has been made on the ParkBench I/O initiative. A new I/O project between ECMWF, FECIT, and the Univ. of Southampton was launched this past February. They are looking at the I/O in the IFS code from the ECMWF (European Weather Forecasting). David Snelling is the FECIT leader who has also participated in ParkBench activities. This I/O project has 1 FTE at Southampton and 1.5 FTE at FECIT along with several personnel at ECMWF. One workshop, two technical meetings for the 1-year project is planned. The goals are: to develop instrumented I/O benchmarks and build on top of MPI-IO (test, characterize parallel systems). Their methodology is very similar to that of ParkBench. Codes in f90 and ANSI C are being considered (stubs for VAMPIR and PABLO). Regular reports to Fujitsu (sponsor of activity) are planned and a full I/O test suite is planned by February 1998. MBa also reported on the status of the ParkBench graphical database. Currently, the performance data is kept in a relational DBMS. A frontend Java applet has been written to query the DBMS on-the-fly. A backend is also in development which will automate the extraction of new performance data and insertion into the DBMS (via an http server). By September, a more complete prototype which will allow MS access and JDBC between 2 different machines should be ready. VG then discussed the development of Java-based low-level benchmarks. He presented a Java-to-C Interface Generator which would allow Java benchmarks to call existing C libraries on remote machines. He presented sample Java+C NAS PB results on a 16-processor IBM SP/2 (Class A IS Benchmark): Version 1 Proc 2Procs 4 Procs 8 Procs 16 Procs NASA (C) 29.1 17.4 9.4 5.2 2.8 C 40.5 24.9 13.1 9.3 15.6 Java ---- 132.5 64.7 37.9 33.5 At 2:50pm, TH reported other ParkBench activities including the new PEMCS (Performance Evaluation and Modeling for Computer Systems) electronic journal. Suggested articles/authors include: *1. ParkBench Report No. 2 (ES, MBe) *2. NAS PB 3. SPEC-HPG *4. Top 500 5. AutoBench (M. Ginsburg) *6. Euroben (van der Steen) 7. RAPS 8. Europort *9. Cache benchmarks 10. ASCI benchmarks (DoD) *11. PERFORM 12. R. Hockney *13. PEPS 14. C3I/Rome Labs Those articles possible for Summer '97 are marked via *. JD suggested that articles be available in Encapsulated Postscript, PDF (Adobe), and HTML. TH noted that EU funding will provide a host computer and some administration. Possible publishers are Oxford Univ. Press and Elsevier. At 3:10pm, ES requested more items for the ParkBench bibliography which will be available on the WWW. PW suggested that authors should be able to submit links to ParkBench-related applications. JD then briefly discussed WebBench which is a website focused on benchmarking and performance evaluation. Data is presented on platform,s applications, organizations, vendors, conferences, papers, newsgroups, FAQ's, and repositories (PDS, Top500, Linpack, etc.). The WebBench URL is http://www.netlib.org/benchweb. MBa reminded attendees of the Fall Performance Workshop/ParkBench meeting on (Thursday and Friday) Sept. 11 and 12. This meeting will be held at Venue, County Hotel, Southampton, UK. Invited and contributed talks will be presented. With regard to ParkBench funding, JD indicated that the UT/ORNL/NASA Ames proposal was not selected for funding but that it could be re- submitted next year. Expected funding from Rome lab was not received. TH and VG did not succeed this past year either although some funding from Fujitsu is possible. TH adjourned the meeting at 3:25pm EST. From owner-parkbench-comm@CS.UTK.EDU Tue May 27 10:32:45 1997 Return-Path: Received: from CS.UTK.EDU by netlib2.cs.utk.edu with ESMTP (cf v2.9t-netlib) id KAA25239; Tue, 27 May 1997 10:32:45 -0400 Received: from localhost (root@localhost) by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id KAA05022; Tue, 27 May 1997 10:12:02 -0400 Received: from exu.inf.puc-rio.br (exu.inf.puc-rio.br [139.82.16.3]) by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id KAA05013; Tue, 27 May 1997 10:11:53 -0400 Received: from obaluae (obaluae.inf.puc-rio.br) by exu.inf.puc-rio.br (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA20170; Tue, 27 May 97 11:11:00 EST From: maira@inf.puc-rio.br (Maira Tres Medina) Received: by obaluae (SMI-8.6/client-1.3) id LAA16226; Tue, 27 May 1997 11:10:58 -0300 Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 11:10:58 -0300 Message-Id: <199705271410.LAA16226@obaluae> To: parkbench-comments@CS.UTK.EDU Subject: Benchmarks Cc: parkbench-comm@CS.UTK.EDU, maira@CS.UTK.EDU, victal@CS.UTK.EDU X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII Hello I'm a graduate student at the Computer Science Department of PUC-Rio (Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro). I'm currently studing Low_Level benchmarks for measuring basic computer characteristics. I have had same problems trying to run some of the benchmarks. For example, the benchmark comms1 for PVM, prints the following errors messages and stops. n05.sp1.lncc.br:/u/renata/maira/ParkBench/bin/RS6K>comms1_pvm Number of nodes = 2 Front End System (1=yes, 0=no) = 0 Spawning done by process (1=yes, 0=no) = 1 Spawned 0 processes OK... libpvm [t4000c]: pvm_mcast(): Bad parameter TIDs sent...benchmark progressing... n05.sp1.lncc.br:/u/renata/maira/ParkBench> bin/RS6K/comms1_pvm 1525-006 The OPEN request cannot be processed because STATUS=OLD was coded in the OPEN statement but the file comms1.dat does not exist. The program will continue if ERR= or IOSTAT= has been coded in the OPEN statement. 1525-099 Program is stopping because errors have occurred in an I/O request and ERR= or IOSTAT= was not coded in the I/O statement. I would like to know how I can execute the benchmarks only for PVM. Can you help me? I have not had problems with benchmarks sequentials (tick1, tick2 ...). Thank you very much for your attention. Maira Tres Medina Phd. Student Pontificial Catholic University Rio de Janeiro, Brazil From owner-parkbench-comm@CS.UTK.EDU Wed May 28 16:36:07 1997 Return-Path: Received: from CS.UTK.EDU by netlib2.cs.utk.edu with ESMTP (cf v2.9t-netlib) id QAA15377; Wed, 28 May 1997 16:36:06 -0400 Received: from localhost (root@localhost) by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id QAA16158; Wed, 28 May 1997 16:26:41 -0400 Received: from rastaman.rmt.utk.edu (root@TCHM03A16.RMT.UTK.EDU [128.169.27.60]) by CS.UTK.EDU with ESMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id QAA16150; Wed, 28 May 1997 16:26:37 -0400 Received: from rastaman.rmt.utk.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rastaman.rmt.utk.edu (8.7.6/8.7.3) with SMTP id QAA00226; Wed, 28 May 1997 16:33:33 -0400 Sender: mucci@CS.UTK.EDU Message-ID: <338C968B.124F15AA@cs.utk.edu> Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 16:33:33 -0400 From: "Philip J. Mucci" Organization: University of Tennessee, Knoxville X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (X11; I; Linux 2.0.28 i586) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Maira Tres Medina CC: parkbench-comments@CS.UTK.EDU, parkbench-comm@CS.UTK.EDU Subject: Re: Benchmarks References: <199705271410.LAA16226@obaluae> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, You need to make sure the dat files are in the executable directory. They should be installed in $PVM_ROOT/bin/$PVM_ARCH. -Phil -- /%*\ Philip J. Mucci | GRA in CS under Dr. JJ Dongarra /*%\ \*%/ http://www.cs.utk.edu/~mucci PVM/Active Messages \%*/ From owner-parkbench-comm@CS.UTK.EDU Thu Jun 5 11:30:41 1997 Return-Path: Received: from CS.UTK.EDU by netlib2.cs.utk.edu with ESMTP (cf v2.9t-netlib) id LAA11302; Thu, 5 Jun 1997 11:30:41 -0400 Received: from localhost (root@localhost) by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id KAA14227; Thu, 5 Jun 1997 10:53:09 -0400 Received: from haven.EPM.ORNL.GOV (haven.epm.ornl.gov [134.167.12.69]) by CS.UTK.EDU with ESMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id KAA14220; Thu, 5 Jun 1997 10:53:07 -0400 Received: (from worley@localhost) by haven.EPM.ORNL.GOV (8.8.3/8.8.3) id KAA06499; Thu, 5 Jun 1997 10:53:06 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 10:53:06 -0400 (EDT) From: Pat Worley Message-Id: <199706051453.KAA06499@haven.EPM.ORNL.GOV> To: parkbench-comm@CS.UTK.EDU Subject: Gordon conference deadline extended Forwarding: Mail from 'Pat Worley ' dated: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 10:48:07 -0400 (EDT) Cc: worley@haven.EPM.ORNL.GOV, tony@cs.msstate.edu (Our apologies if you receive this multiple times.) There is still room for additional attendees at the Gordon Conference on High Performance Computing, and the Gordon Research Conference administration has agreed to extend the application deadline. As a practical matter, applications need to be submitted no later than JULY 1. We will also stop accepting applications before that date if the maximum meeting size is reached, so please apply as soon as possible if you are interested in attending. The simplest way to apply is to download the application form from the web site http://www.erc.msstate.edu/conferences/gordon97 or to use the online registration option available at the same site. If you have any problems with either of these, please contact the organizers at tony@cs.msstate.edu and worleyph@ornl.gov. Complete information on the meeting is available from the Web site or its links, but a short summary of the meeting follows: -------------------------------------------------------------------------- The 1997 Gordon Conference on High Performance Computing and Information Infrastructure: "Practical Revolutions in HPC and NII" Chair, Anthony Skjellum, Mississippi State University, tony@cs.msstate.edu, 601-325-8435 Co-Chair, Pat Worley, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, worleyph@ornl.gov, 615-574-3128 Conference web page: http://www.erc.msstate.edu/conferences/gordon97 July 13-17, 1997 Plymouth State College Plymouth NH The now bi-annual Gordon conference series in HPC and NII commenced in 1992 and has had its second meeting in 1995. The Gordon conferences are an elite series of conferences designed to advance the state-of-the-art in covered disciplines. Speakers are assured of anonymity and referencing presentations done at Gordon conferences is prohibited by conference rules in order to promote science, rather than publication lists. Previous meetings have had good international participation, and this is always encouraged. Experts, novices, and technically interested parties from other fields interested in HPC and NII are encouraged to apply to attend. The conference consists of technical sessions in the morning and evening, with afternoons free for discussion and recreation. Each session consists of 2 or 3 one hour talks, with ample time for questions and discussion. All speakers are invited and there are no parallel sessions. All attendees are both encouraged and expected to actively participate, via discussions during the technical sessions or via poster presentations. All attendees, including speakers, poster presenters, and session chairs, must apply to attend. Poster presenters should indicate their poster proposals on their applications. While all posters must be approved, successful applicants should assume that their posters have been accpeted unless they hear otherwise. Meeting Themes: Networks: Emerging capabilities and the practical implications : New types of networking Real-Time Issues Multilevel Multicomputers Processors-in-Memory and Other Fine Grain Computational Architectures Impact of Evolving Hardware on Applications Impact of Software Abstractions on Performance Confirmed Speakers: Ashok K. Agrawala University of Maryland Kirstie Bellman DARPA/SISTO James C. Browne University of Texas at Austin Andrew Chien University of Illiniois, Urbana-Champaign Thomas H. Cormen Dartmouth College Jean-Dominique Decotignie CSEM David Greenberg Sandia National Laboratories William Gropp Argonne National Laboratory Don Heller Ames Laboratory Jeff Koller Information Sciences Institute Peter Kogge University of Notre Dame Chris Landauer The Aerospace Corporation Olaf M. Lubeck Los Alamos National Laboratory Andrew Lumsdaine University of Notre Dame Lenore Mullins SUNY, Albany Paul Plassmann Argonne National Laboratory Lui Sha Carnegie Mellon Univeristy Paul Woodward University of Minnesota From owner-parkbench-comm@CS.UTK.EDU Tue Jul 1 17:06:52 1997 Return-Path: Received: from CS.UTK.EDU by netlib2.cs.utk.edu with ESMTP (cf v2.9t-netlib) id RAA20550; Tue, 1 Jul 1997 17:06:51 -0400 Received: from localhost (root@localhost) by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id RAA21503; Tue, 1 Jul 1997 17:03:35 -0400 Received: from osiris.sis.port.ac.uk (root@osiris.sis.port.ac.uk [148.197.100.10]) by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id RAA21438; Tue, 1 Jul 1997 17:02:42 -0400 Received: from baker (baker.npac.syr.edu) by osiris.sis.port.ac.uk (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA10168; Tue, 1 Jul 97 22:00:22 BST Date: Tue, 1 Jul 97 20:55:49 From: Mark Baker Subject: Fall 97 Parkbench Workshop - Southampton, UK To: ejz@ecs.soton.ac.uk, parkbench-comm@CS.UTK.EDU, parkbench-hpf@CS.UTK.EDU, William Gropp , Antoine Hyaric , gent@genias.de, gcf@npac.syr.edu, geerd.hoffman@ecmwf.co.uk, reed@cs.uiuc.edu, david@cs.cf.ac.uk, clemens-august.thole@gmd.de, klaus.stueben@gmd.de, "J.C.T. Pool" , Paul Messina , foster@mcs.anl.gov, idh@soton.ac.uk, rjc@soton.ac.uk, plg@pac.soton.ac.uk, Graham.Nudd@dcs.warwick.ac.uk Cc: lec@ecs.soton.ac.uk, rjr@ecs.soton.ac.uk, "MATRAVERS Prof. D R STAF" , wilsona@sis.port.ac.uk, grant , hwyau@epcc.ed.ac.uk X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-Mailer: Chameleon 5.0.1, TCP/IP for Windows, NetManage Inc. Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Dear All, This is to let you know that the Department of Electronics and Computer Science at the University of Southampton is organising a Fall 97 Parkbench Workshop on the 11th and 12th of September 1997. See http://hpc-journals.ecs.soton.ac.uk/Workshops/PEMCS/fall-97/ for futher details. The workshop will include a number of talks from researchers working in th field of performance evaluation and modelling of computer systems, a panel discussion session and a Parkbench committee meeting. The Workshop is free to attend - workshop delegates need only cover their own travel and accommodation expenses. Attendance is limited and so the availability of places at the Workshop will be allocated on a first come basis. It is planned to turn the talks given at the Workshop into a series of short papers which will be put together and published as a Special Issue of the electronic journal Performance Evaluation and Modelling of Computer Systems (PEMCS). For further information or registration details refer to the Web pages - (http://hpc-journals.ecs.soton.ac.uk/Workshops/PEMCS/fall-97/registration.html). I would appreciate it if you would kindly pass this email onto colleges who may be interested in the event. Regards Mark ------------------------------------- Dr Mark Baker CSM, University of Portsmouth, Hants, UK Tel: +44 1705 844285 Fax: +44 1705 844006 E-mail: mab@sis.port.ac.uk Date: 7/1/97 - Time: 8:55:49 PM URL http://www.sis.port.ac.uk/~mab/ ------------------------------------- From owner-parkbench-comm@CS.UTK.EDU Wed Jul 23 17:19:23 1997 Return-Path: Received: from CS.UTK.EDU by netlib2.cs.utk.edu with ESMTP (cf v2.9t-netlib) id RAA04434; Wed, 23 Jul 1997 17:19:23 -0400 Received: from localhost (root@localhost) by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id RAA28191; Wed, 23 Jul 1997 17:10:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from osiris.sis.port.ac.uk (root@osiris.sis.port.ac.uk [148.197.100.10]) by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id RAA28171; Wed, 23 Jul 1997 17:10:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from baker (baker.npac.syr.edu) by osiris.sis.port.ac.uk (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA14190; Wed, 23 Jul 97 22:10:30 BST Date: Wed, 23 Jul 97 22:01:41 +0000 From: Mark Baker Subject: PEMCS Web Site To: parkbench-comm@CS.UTK.EDU, parkbench-hpf@CS.UTK.EDU X-Mailer: Chameleon ATX 6.0.1, Standards Based IntraNet Solutions, NetManage Inc. X-Face: "3@c]&iv:nfs&\mp6nN90ioxbQ-Eu:]}^MyviIL7YjwT,Cl)|TYpTQ})PP'&O=V`~)JQRWjM?H;'`q\"3mv "j@5vs)}!WC3pG9q:;rpe0\LoLQfY"1?1A.\(f=E*&QAW8WK+)*)T0[Bv=[{.-f7<6Ddv!2XaWhH X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Dear All, The Web site that will host the Journal of "Performance Evaluation and Modelling of Computer Systems (PEMCS)" can be found at: http://hpc-journals.ecs.soton.ac.uk/PEMCS/ The pages I have put up are at the present still in a "draft/under-construction" state. I would appreciate any comments or feedback about the pages. Regards Mark ------------------------------------- Dr Mark Baker DIS, University of Portsmouth, Hants, UK Tel: +44 1705 844285 Fax: +44 1705 844006 E-mail: mab@sis.port.ac.uk Date: 07/23/97 - Time: 22:01:41 URL http://www.sis.port.ac.uk/~mab/ ------------------------------------- From owner-parkbench-comm@CS.UTK.EDU Thu Jul 24 08:26:42 1997 Return-Path: Received: from CS.UTK.EDU by netlib2.cs.utk.edu with ESMTP (cf v2.9t-netlib) id IAA12708; Thu, 24 Jul 1997 08:26:42 -0400 Received: from localhost (root@localhost) by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id IAA04617; Thu, 24 Jul 1997 08:21:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from berry.cs.utk.edu (BERRY.CS.UTK.EDU [128.169.94.70]) by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id IAA04599; Thu, 24 Jul 1997 08:21:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from cs.utk.edu by berry.cs.utk.edu with ESMTP (cf v2.11c-UTK) id IAA13817; Thu, 24 Jul 1997 08:21:24 -0400 Message-Id: <199707241221.IAA13817@berry.cs.utk.edu> To: Mark Baker cc: parkbench-comm@CS.UTK.EDU, parkbench-hpf@CS.UTK.EDU Subject: Re: PEMCS Web Site In-reply-to: Your message of Wed, 23 Jul 1997 22:01:41 -0000. Date: Thu, 24 Jul 1997 08:21:24 -0400 From: "Michael W. Berry" > Dear All, > > The Web site that will host the Journal of "Performance > Evaluation and Modelling of Computer Systems (PEMCS)" can > be found at: > > http://hpc-journals.ecs.soton.ac.uk/PEMCS/ > > The pages I have put up are at the present still in a > "draft/under-construction" state. > > I would appreciate any comments or feedback about the > pages. > > Regards > > Mark > > > > ------------------------------------- > Dr Mark Baker > DIS, University of Portsmouth, Hants, UK > Tel: +44 1705 844285 Fax: +44 1705 844006 > E-mail: mab@sis.port.ac.uk > Date: 07/23/97 - Time: 22:01:41 > URL http://www.sis.port.ac.uk/~mab/ > ------------------------------------- > Mark, the webpages are well organized. You might reconsider the red text on the green background of the menu frame. It was difficult to read on my machine at home. Nice work! Mike ------------------------------------------------------------------- Michael W. Berry Ayres Hall 114 berry@cs.utk.edu Department of Computer Science OFF:(423) 974-3838 University of Tennessee FAX:(423) 974-4404 Knoxville, TN 37996-1301 URL:http://www.cs.utk.edu/~berry/ ------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-parkbench-comm@CS.UTK.EDU Fri Aug 1 12:59:29 1997 Return-Path: Received: from CS.UTK.EDU by netlib2.cs.utk.edu with ESMTP (cf v2.9t-netlib) id MAA05831; Fri, 1 Aug 1997 12:59:27 -0400 Received: from localhost (root@localhost) by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id MAA01387; Fri, 1 Aug 1997 12:38:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: from osiris.sis.port.ac.uk (root@osiris.sis.port.ac.uk [148.197.100.10]) by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id MAA01337; Fri, 1 Aug 1997 12:37:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from baker (baker.npac.syr.edu) by osiris.sis.port.ac.uk (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA15842; Fri, 1 Aug 97 17:36:11 BST Date: Fri, 1 Aug 97 17:17:51 +0000 From: Mark Baker Subject: Reminder - Fall Parkbench Workshop To: parkbench-comm@CS.UTK.EDU, parkbench-hpf@CS.UTK.EDU X-Mailer: Chameleon ATX 6.0.1, Standards Based IntraNet Solutions, NetManage Inc. X-Face: ,<'y31|nlb,jCP5?km9\KD+>p9/e?:|$RRhY]e;#`awGHh=mrY.T??#]-*rt}l0*u`k2A7n KlqNG"u'-%cS@3|G[%=m%bSB[lfSn5n"gD4CU(j?1y?#SOkm!qw_=p%c#"6g&(+\Oy6T{4CEShal?z M)&Gd'Pb6Qc~>SPx{m[F55=]yY>cN>|/m5)T?q`OTjdQL=7-n%NT({;;$P*2[#7ZWL8baLoI_/F89, x'u`*$'<|ctKNYTSJuLV=!$QT3bN*>91V,a0Cc"_UsxwMKg\;#W2LZ$!`j?ZWp;byz~;y}2Dz6i7y% E&;gfnmI_~}+oifmWXJMHfWeezBL1("ZnFe!rnX[Q|,:IJ?iq+PePa/[3R4 X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Dear All, This email is a reminder about the: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fall ParkBench Workshop Thursday 11th/Friday 12th September 1997 at the University of Southampton, UK See http://hpc-journals.ecs.soton.ac.uk/Workshops/PEMCS/fall-97/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- If you are interested in attending the Workshop you should register now and reserve accommodation as hotel rooms in Southampton during the workshop period will be in short supply due to the "International Southampton Boat Show" which will also be taking place. At present we have a preliminary reservation on rooms at the County Hotel where the Workshop is being held. Without concrete delegate reservations we can only hold onto there rooms for approximately another week. Thereafter, accommodation at the Hotel, or around the city, may be more problematic in getting and reserving. So, I encourage potential Workshop delegates to register ASAP. Mark ------------------------------------- Dr Mark Baker University of Portsmouth, Hants, UK Tel: +44 1705 844285 Fax: +44 1705 844006 E-mail: mab@sis.port.ac.uk Date: 08/01/97 - Time: 17:17:52 URL http://www.sis.port.ac.uk/~mab/ ------------------------------------- From owner-parkbench-comm@CS.UTK.EDU Mon Aug 11 13:13:12 1997 Return-Path: Received: from CS.UTK.EDU by netlib2.cs.utk.edu with ESMTP (cf v2.9t-netlib) id NAA20171; Mon, 11 Aug 1997 13:13:11 -0400 Received: from localhost (root@localhost) by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id NAA06842; Mon, 11 Aug 1997 13:02:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from MIT.EDU (SOUTH-STATION-ANNEX.MIT.EDU [18.72.1.2]) by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id NAA06808; Mon, 11 Aug 1997 13:02:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from MIT.MIT.EDU by MIT.EDU with SMTP id AA27349; Mon, 11 Aug 97 13:02:14 EDT Received: from HOCKEY.MIT.EDU by MIT.MIT.EDU (5.61/4.7) id AA01161; Mon, 11 Aug 97 13:02:12 EDT Message-Id: <9708111702.AA01161@MIT.MIT.EDU> X-Sender: mmccarth@po9.mit.edu X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.1.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 11 Aug 1997 13:02:12 -0400 To: alison.wall@rl.ac.uk, weber@scripps.edu, schauser@cs.ucsb.edu, dewombl@sandia.gov, edgorha@sandia.gov, rdskocy@sandia.gov, sales@pgroup.com, utpds@CS.UTK.EDU, parkbench-comm@CS.UTK.EDU, pancake@cs.orst.edu, johnreed@ghost.CS.ORST.EDU, levesque@apri.com, davida@cit.gu.edu.au, gddt@gup.uni-linz.ac.at, atempt@gup.uni-linz.ac.at, rileyba@ornl.gov, bac@ccs.ornl.gov From: "Michael F. McCarthy" Subject: For Sale: CM-5 PLEASE FORWARD THIS NOTE TO ANYONE THAT YOU BELIEVE MAY HAVE AN INTEREST IN PURCHASING THIS SYSTEM! __________________________________________________________________________ Case #3971 -- FOR SALE - CM5 with 128 nodes and SDA -- __________________________________________________________________________ The MIT Lab for Computer Science offers for bid sale a Thinking Machines CM-5 Connection Machine (described below). Bids to purchase this system are requested from all interested parties, (with a minimum expected Bid of $25,000). All bids must be received at the MIT property office by 5:00 PM (EDT) on Monday, 8/Sept/97. The machine must be moved from MIT within 10 business days of acceptance of the bid. All expenses and arrangements for moving will be made by purchaser. The system consists of: 1) 128 PN CM-5 w/ Vector Units, 256 Network addresses-Part No.CM5-128V-32F 2) Scalable Disk Array with Twenty-four(24) 1.2 GB Drives-Part No.CM5-SA25F 3) Control Processor Interface-Part No. CM5-CPI 4) S-Bus to Diagnostics Network Interface-Part No. CM5-SDN 5) S-Bus Network Interface Board(5)-Part No. CM5-SNI [N.B. On July 16 1997 power was turned off.The machine can be turned back on in its present location only until Friday, 22/AUG/97 when wiring changes are planned in that machine room.] "The Institute reserves the right to reject any or all offers.MIT makes no warranty of any kind, express or implied, with respect to this equipment. This includes fitness for a particular purpose. It is the responsibility of those making an offer to determine, before making an offer, that the equipment meets any conditions required by those making that offer.Thank you." __________________________________________________________________________ Submit bids for Case #3971 before Monday, 8/Sept/97, 5:00 PM (EDT) to: ***************************************************************** * Michael F. McCarthy * Phone: (617)253-2779 * * MIT Property Office * FAX: (617)253-2444 * * E19-429 * E-Mail: mmccarth@MIT.EDU * * 77 Massachusetts Ave. * * * Cambridge, MA 02139 * * ***************************************************************** __________________________________________________________________________ SYSTEM HISTORY The Project SCOUT CM-5 is housed in M.I.T's Laboratory for Computer Science (L.C.S). The machine was acquired in 1993 as part of the the ARPA sponsored project SCOUT, and used to accomplish the stated aim of the project of "fermenting collaborations between users, builders and networkers of massively parallel computers". The CM-5 computer, developed and manufactured by Thinking Machines Corporation, evolved from earlier T.M.C. computers (the CM-2 and the CM-200)with an architecture targeted toward teraflops performance for large, complex data intensive applications. The MIT hardware consists of a total of 128 32MHz SPARC microprocessors, each with 4 proprietary floating point arithmetic units and 32Mb of local memory attached to it. The system also includes a subsidiary 25Gb parallel file system for handling high volume parallel application I/O. The system was operated under full maintenance contract from May of 1993 until March 20 1997. On July 16 1997 power was turned off. The machine can be turned back on in its present location only until Friday, 22/AUG/97 when wiring changes are planned in that machine room. The system was used primarily for research but a description of an instructional use made of the machine can be found at http://www-erl.mit.edu/eaps/seminar/iap95/cnh/CM5Intro.html Web sites about other CM5 sites and general information include: http://www.math.uic.edu/~hanson/cmg.html http://www.acl.lanl.gov/UserInfo/cm5admin.html http://ec.msc.edu/CM5/ __________________________________________________________________________ FUTURE MAINTENANCE People submitting bids may wish to discuss future maintenance issues with a company that is a present maintainer of CM5 Equipment, Connection Machine Services. ***************************************************************** * Larry Stewart * Phone: (505) 820-1470 * * * Cell: (505) 690-7799 * * Account Executive * FAX: (505) 820-0810 * * Connection Machines Services * Home: (505) 983-9670 * * 1373 Camino Sin Salida * Pager (888) 712-4143 * * Santa Fe, NM 87501 * E-Mail: stewart@ix.netcom.com * ***************************************************************** __________________________________________________________________________ Michael F. McCarthy MIT Property Office E19-429 77 Massachusetts Ave. Cambridge, MA 02139 Ph (617)253-2779 Fax (617)253-2444 From owner-parkbench-comm@CS.UTK.EDU Mon Sep 1 05:44:50 1997 Return-Path: Received: from CS.UTK.EDU by netlib2.cs.utk.edu with ESMTP (cf v2.9t-netlib) id FAA11838; Mon, 1 Sep 1997 05:44:50 -0400 Received: from localhost (root@localhost) by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id FAA07176; Mon, 1 Sep 1997 05:35:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from osiris.sis.port.ac.uk (root@osiris.sis.port.ac.uk [148.197.100.10]) by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id FAA07160; Mon, 1 Sep 1997 05:34:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mordillo (pc297.sis.port.ac.uk) by osiris.sis.port.ac.uk (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA14311; Mon, 1 Sep 97 10:33:06 BST Date: Mon, 1 Sep 97 10:19:23 +0000 From: Mark Baker Subject: Final Announcement: Fall ParkBench Workshop To: "Daniel A. Reed" , "J.C.T. Pool" , a.j.grant@mcc.ac.uk, Antoine Hyaric , Ed Zaluska , Fritz Ferstl , Hon W Yau , idh@soton.ac.uk, parkbench-comm@CS.UTK.EDU, parkbench-hpf@CS.UTK.EDU, Paul Messina , R.Rankin@Queens-Belfast.AC.UK, rjc@soton.ac.uk, topic@mcc.ac.uk, Wolfgang Genzsch Cc: lec@ecs.soton.ac.uk X-Mailer: Chameleon ATX 6.0.1, Standards Based IntraNet Solutions, NetManage Inc. X-Face: ,<'y31|nlb,jCP5?km9\KD+>p9/e?:|$RRhY]e;#`awGHh=mrY.T??#]-*rt}l0*u`k2A7n KlqNG"u'-%cS@3|G[%=m%bSB[lfSn5n"gD4CU(j?1y?#SOkm!qw_=p%c#"6g&(+\Oy6T{4CEShal?z M)&Gd'Pb6Qc~>SPx{m[F55=]yY>cN>|/m5)T?q`OTjdQL=7-n%NT({;;$P*2[#7ZWL8baLoI_/F89, x'u`*$'<|ctKNYTSJuLV=!$QT3bN*>91V,a0Cc"_UsxwMKg\;#W2LZ$!`j?ZWp;byz~;y}2Dz6i7y% E&;gfnmI_~}+oifmWXJMHfWeezBL1("ZnFe!rnX[Q|,:IJ?iq+PePa/[3R4 X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Dear all, This is the FINAL ANNOUNCEMENT: If you would like to attend this workshop please let Lesley Courtney (lec@ecs.soton.ac.uk) know by Friday 5th September 1997 at the latest as we need to confirm numbers. Workshop details can be found at http://hpc-journals.ecs.soton.ac.uk/Workshops/PEMCS/fall-97/ Regards Mark ------------------------------------- Dr Mark Baker University of Portsmouth, Hants, UK Tel: +44 1705 844285 Fax: +44 1705 844006 E-mail: mab@sis.port.ac.uk Date: 09/01/97 - Time: 10:19:23 URL http://www.sis.port.ac.uk/~mab/ ------------------------------------- From owner-parkbench-comm@CS.UTK.EDU Wed Sep 3 15:37:55 1997 Return-Path: Received: from CS.UTK.EDU by netlib2.cs.utk.edu with ESMTP (cf v2.9t-netlib) id PAA20262; Wed, 3 Sep 1997 15:37:55 -0400 Received: from localhost (root@localhost) by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id PAA08273; Wed, 3 Sep 1997 15:19:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from punt-2.mail.demon.net (punt-2b.mail.demon.net [194.217.242.6]) by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id PAA08262; Wed, 3 Sep 1997 15:19:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: from minnow.demon.co.uk ([158.152.73.63]) by punt-2.mail.demon.net id aa0626941; 3 Sep 97 17:35 BST Message-ID: Date: Wed, 3 Sep 1997 16:31:07 +0100 To: parkbench-comm@CS.UTK.EDU From: Roger Hockney Subject: Prototype PICT release 1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Turnpike Version 3.03a At their last meeting the Parkbench Committee recommended that an interactive curve fitting tool be produced for the postprocessing and parametrisation of Parkbench results using the latest Internet Web technology. I have produced a prototype of such a tool as a Java applet running on a Web page on the user's machine and called it PICT (Parkbench Interactive Curve-fitting Tool). This is now ready for evaluation and testing by the committee. The tool provides the following features: (1) Automatic plotting of Low-Level Parkbench output files from a URL anywhere on the Web (At present limited to New COMMS1 and Raw data, but easily extended to original COMMS1 and RINF1). This is useful for a quick comparison of raw data. (2) Automatic plotting of both 2 and 3-parameter curve-fits which are produce by the benchmarks. Good for checking the quality of the fits. (3) Allows manual rescaling of the graph range to suit the data, either by typing in the required range values or by dragging out a range box with the mouse. (4) Allows the 2-parameter and 3-parameter performance curves to be manually moved about the graph in order to fine tune the fits. The curve follows the mouse and the RMS and MAX percentage errors are shown as the curve moves. Alternatively parameter values can be typed in and the Manual button pressed when the curve for these values will be plotted. (5) The data file being plotted can be VIEWed and a HELP button provides a description of the action of each button in a separate windows. The PICT applet has been built on top of Leigh Brookshaw's 2D plotting package the URL for which is given at the bottom of the HELP window. The features under the RESTART button are in his original code, I have just added the 2-PARA and 3-PARA features. The applet was developed using JDK1.0 beta on a PC with a 1600x1200 display and works on the PC both locally and from my Web page with appletview, MSIE 3.02 and Netscape 3.01. It has also been successfully run on a Solaris Sun with NS3.01, but another Sun user has reported no graphs and errors due to "wrong applet version". So please report your experiences (both success and failure please) to me with all the details. To play with PICT turn your browser to: http://www.minnow.demon.co.uk/pict/source/pict1.html or pict1a.html pict1.html asks for 1000x732 pixels and suits PCs best (it's about the minimum useful size). pict1a.html asks for 1020x900 pixels and was necessary for the whole applet to visible on the Sun. For those wishing to look closer all the source is provided and should be downloadable. Suggestions for improvement, corrections or constructive criticism are solicited. I have asked for an agenda item to be included for the Parkbench meeting on 11 Sept in Southampton so that PICT can be discussed. I look forward to seeing some of you there. -- Roger Hockney. Checkout my new Web page at URL http://www.minnow.demon.co.uk University of and link to my new book: "The Science of Computer Benchmarking" Westminster UK suggestions welcome. Know any fish movies or suitable links? From owner-parkbench-lowlevel@CS.UTK.EDU Wed Sep 10 06:29:15 1997 Return-Path: Received: from CS.UTK.EDU by netlib2.cs.utk.edu with ESMTP (cf v2.9t-netlib) id GAA21129; Wed, 10 Sep 1997 06:29:14 -0400 Received: from localhost (root@localhost) by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id GAA20815; Wed, 10 Sep 1997 06:31:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from sun3.nsfnet-relay.ac.uk (sun3.nsfnet-relay.ac.uk [128.86.8.50]) by CS.UTK.EDU with ESMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id GAA20791; Wed, 10 Sep 1997 06:30:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from bright.ecs.soton.ac.uk by sun3.nsfnet-relay.ac.uk with JANET SMTP (PP); Wed, 10 Sep 1997 11:30:44 +0100 Received: from landlord.ecs.soton.ac.uk by bright.ecs.soton.ac.uk; Wed, 10 Sep 97 11:32:57 BST From: Vladimir Getov Received: from bill.ecs.soton.ac.uk by landlord.ecs.soton.ac.uk; Wed, 10 Sep 97 11:33:16 BST Date: Wed, 10 Sep 97 11:33:13 BST Message-Id: <2458.9709101033@bill.ecs.soton.ac.uk> To: parkbench-lowlevel@CS.UTK.EDU, parkbench-comm@CS.UTK.EDU, parkbench-hpf@CS.UTK.EDU Subject: ParkBench Committee Meeting - tentative Agenda Dear Colleague, The ParkBench (Parallel Benchmark Working Group) will meet in Southampton, U.K. on September 11th, 1997 as part of the ParkBench Workshop. The Workshop site will be the County Hotel in Southampton. County Hotel Highfield Lane Southampton, U.K. Phone: +44-(0)1703-359955 Please send us your comments about the tentative agenda: 14:30 Finalize meeting agenda Minutes of last meeting (Erich Strohmaier) 14:45 Changes to Current release: - Low Level COMMS benchmarks (Vladimir Getov) - NAS Parallel Benchmarks (Subhash Saini) 15:15 New benchmarks: - HPF Low Level benchmarks (Mark Baker) 15:30 ParkBench Performance Analysis Tools: - ParkBench Result Templates (Vladimir Getov and Mark Papiani) - Visualization of Parallel Benchmark Results - new GBIS (Mark Papiani and Flavio Bergamaschi) - Interactive Web-page Curve-fitting of Parallel Performance Measurements (Roger Hockney) 16:15 Demonstrations: - Java Low-Level Benchmarks (Vladimir Getov) - BenchView: Java Tool for Visualization of Parallel Benchmark Results (Mark Papiani and Flavio Bergamaschi) - PICT: An Interactive Web-page Curve-fitting Tool (Roger Hockney) 16:45 Other activities: - "Electronic Benchmarking Journal" - status report (Mark Baker) Miscellaneous Date and venue for next meeting 17:00 Adjourn Tony Hey Vladimir Getov Erich Strohmaier From owner-parkbench-comm@CS.UTK.EDU Wed Sep 10 06:40:25 1997 Return-Path: Received: from CS.UTK.EDU by netlib2.cs.utk.edu with ESMTP (cf v2.9t-netlib) id GAA21186; Wed, 10 Sep 1997 06:40:25 -0400 Received: from localhost (root@localhost) by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id GAA20806; Wed, 10 Sep 1997 06:31:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from sun3.nsfnet-relay.ac.uk (sun3.nsfnet-relay.ac.uk [128.86.8.50]) by CS.UTK.EDU with ESMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id GAA20791; Wed, 10 Sep 1997 06:30:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from bright.ecs.soton.ac.uk by sun3.nsfnet-relay.ac.uk with JANET SMTP (PP); Wed, 10 Sep 1997 11:30:44 +0100 Received: from landlord.ecs.soton.ac.uk by bright.ecs.soton.ac.uk; Wed, 10 Sep 97 11:32:57 BST From: Vladimir Getov Received: from bill.ecs.soton.ac.uk by landlord.ecs.soton.ac.uk; Wed, 10 Sep 97 11:33:16 BST Date: Wed, 10 Sep 97 11:33:13 BST Message-Id: <2458.9709101033@bill.ecs.soton.ac.uk> To: parkbench-lowlevel@CS.UTK.EDU, parkbench-comm@CS.UTK.EDU, parkbench-hpf@CS.UTK.EDU Subject: ParkBench Committee Meeting - tentative Agenda Dear Colleague, The ParkBench (Parallel Benchmark Working Group) will meet in Southampton, U.K. on September 11th, 1997 as part of the ParkBench Workshop. The Workshop site will be the County Hotel in Southampton. County Hotel Highfield Lane Southampton, U.K. Phone: +44-(0)1703-359955 Please send us your comments about the tentative agenda: 14:30 Finalize meeting agenda Minutes of last meeting (Erich Strohmaier) 14:45 Changes to Current release: - Low Level COMMS benchmarks (Vladimir Getov) - NAS Parallel Benchmarks (Subhash Saini) 15:15 New benchmarks: - HPF Low Level benchmarks (Mark Baker) 15:30 ParkBench Performance Analysis Tools: - ParkBench Result Templates (Vladimir Getov and Mark Papiani) - Visualization of Parallel Benchmark Results - new GBIS (Mark Papiani and Flavio Bergamaschi) - Interactive Web-page Curve-fitting of Parallel Performance Measurements (Roger Hockney) 16:15 Demonstrations: - Java Low-Level Benchmarks (Vladimir Getov) - BenchView: Java Tool for Visualization of Parallel Benchmark Results (Mark Papiani and Flavio Bergamaschi) - PICT: An Interactive Web-page Curve-fitting Tool (Roger Hockney) 16:45 Other activities: - "Electronic Benchmarking Journal" - status report (Mark Baker) Miscellaneous Date and venue for next meeting 17:00 Adjourn Tony Hey Vladimir Getov Erich Strohmaier From owner-parkbench-lowlevel@CS.UTK.EDU Thu Sep 18 18:27:19 1997 Return-Path: Received: from CS.UTK.EDU by netlib2.cs.utk.edu with ESMTP (cf v2.9t-netlib) id SAA12991; Thu, 18 Sep 1997 18:27:18 -0400 Received: from localhost (root@localhost) by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id SAA29359; Thu, 18 Sep 1997 18:26:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from k2.llnl.gov (zosel@k2.llnl.gov [134.9.1.1]) by CS.UTK.EDU with ESMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id SAA29352; Thu, 18 Sep 1997 18:26:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from zosel@localhost) by k2.llnl.gov (8.8.5/8.8.5/LLNL-Jun96) id PAA07246 for parkbench-lowlevel@cs.utk.edu; Thu, 18 Sep 1997 15:26:16 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 18 Sep 1997 15:26:16 -0700 (PDT) From: Mary E Zosel Message-Id: <199709182226.PAA07246@k2.llnl.gov> To: parkbench-lowlevel@CS.UTK.EDU Subject: any pthreads tests??? Does anyone know of any low-level performance tests for pthreads libraries??? I'm interested in both single processor performance of pthreads calls - and also multiprocessor (shared memory) calls ... to measure the overhead of the calls. -mary zosel- zosel@llnl.gov From owner-parkbench-lowlevel@CS.UTK.EDU Sun Sep 21 09:13:20 1997 Return-Path: Received: from CS.UTK.EDU by netlib2.cs.utk.edu with ESMTP (cf v2.9t-netlib) id JAA08699; Sun, 21 Sep 1997 09:13:20 -0400 Received: from localhost (root@localhost) by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id JAA15884; Sun, 21 Sep 1997 09:15:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: from osiris.sis.port.ac.uk (root@osiris.sis.port.ac.uk [148.197.100.10]) by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id JAA15877; Sun, 21 Sep 1997 09:15:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mordillo (p41.ascend3.is2.bb.u-net.net) by osiris.sis.port.ac.uk (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA10322; Sun, 21 Sep 97 14:15:58 BST Date: Sun, 21 Sep 97 13:32:56 +0000 From: Mark Baker Subject: Re: any pthreads tests??? To: Mary E Zosel , parkbench-lowlevel@CS.UTK.EDU X-Mailer: Chameleon ATX 6.0.1, Standards Based IntraNet Solutions, NetManage Inc. X-Priority: 3 (Normal) References: <199709182226.PAA07246@k2.llnl.gov> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Mary, This has been talked about as one of the activities that Parkbench would be interested in persuing. But, so far we have not had the time or man-power to follow up our interests. Ron Sercely at HP/CTCX was particularly interested in this area. Also, I know the people at Manchester University wrote a bunch of Pthreads codes - some were benchmarks - for their KSR machine. Hope this helps. Regards Mark --- On Thu, 18 Sep 1997 15:26:16 -0700 (PDT) Mary E Zosel wrote: > Does anyone know of any low-level performance tests for pthreads libraries??? > I'm interested in both single processor performance of pthreads calls - > and also multiprocessor (shared memory) calls ... to measure the overhead > of the calls. > -mary zosel- zosel@llnl.gov > ---------------End of Original Message----------------- ------------------------------------- CSM, University of Portsmouth, Hants, UK Tel: +44 1705 844285 Fax: +44 1705 844006 E-mail: mab@sis.port.ac.uk Date: 09/21/97 - Time: 13:32:57 URL http://www.sis.port.ac.uk/~mab/ ------------------------------------- From owner-parkbench-comm@CS.UTK.EDU Wed Sep 24 06:04:19 1997 Return-Path: Received: from CS.UTK.EDU by netlib2.cs.utk.edu with ESMTP (cf v2.9t-netlib) id GAA23913; Wed, 24 Sep 1997 06:04:18 -0400 Received: from localhost (root@localhost) by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id FAA23163; Wed, 24 Sep 1997 05:46:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: from osiris.sis.port.ac.uk (root@osiris.sis.port.ac.uk [148.197.100.10]) by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id FAA23156; Wed, 24 Sep 1997 05:46:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mordillo (pc297.sis.port.ac.uk) by osiris.sis.port.ac.uk (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA29780; Wed, 24 Sep 97 10:47:01 BST Date: Wed, 24 Sep 97 10:38:39 +0000 From: Mark Baker Subject: PC timers To: parkbench-comm@CS.UTK.EDU, parkbench-low-level@CS.UTK.EDU X-Mailer: Chameleon ATX 6.0.1, Standards Based IntraNet Solutions, NetManage Inc. X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Can someone suggest the appropriate PC-based timer function (MS Visual C++ or Digital Visual Fortran) to replace the usual gettimeofday call !? Cheers Mark ------------------------------------- CSM, University of Portsmouth, Hants, UK Tel: +44 1705 844285 Fax: +44 1705 844006 E-mail: mab@sis.port.ac.uk Date: 09/24/97 - Time: 10:38:39 URL http://www.sis.port.ac.uk/~mab/ ------------------------------------- From owner-parkbench-comm@CS.UTK.EDU Thu Sep 25 10:11:01 1997 Return-Path: Received: from CS.UTK.EDU by netlib2.cs.utk.edu with ESMTP (cf v2.9t-netlib) id KAA20147; Thu, 25 Sep 1997 10:11:01 -0400 Received: from localhost (root@localhost) by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id JAA18087; Thu, 25 Sep 1997 09:24:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from osiris.sis.port.ac.uk (root@osiris.sis.port.ac.uk [148.197.100.10]) by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id JAA18080; Thu, 25 Sep 1997 09:24:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mordillo (pc297.sis.port.ac.uk) by osiris.sis.port.ac.uk (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA12457; Thu, 25 Sep 97 14:25:35 BST Date: Thu, 25 Sep 97 14:11:59 +0000 From: Mark Baker Subject: PC Time function To: parkbench-comm@CS.UTK.EDU X-Mailer: Chameleon ATX 6.0.1, Standards Based IntraNet Solutions, NetManage Inc. X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Thanks to all for timer info. I used the C function _ftime() in the end because it had millisec resolution. Just had to get a my head around using INTERFACE in F90 to include the external C function. I've inserted my version of the _ftime() timer below - I don't think there are any obvious error in it :-) I also implemented the dflib F90 function CALL GETTIM(hour, min, sec, hund) - this function passed tick2 testing but only has 1/100 sec resolution. ------------------------------------------------------- double dwalltime00() { struct _timeb timebuf; _ftime( &timebuf ); return (double) timebuf.time + (double) timebuf.millitm / 1000.0; } double dwalltime00_() { return dwalltime00(); } double DWALLTIME00() { return dwalltime00(); } ------------------------------------------------------- Cheers Mark ------------------------------------- CSM, University of Portsmouth, Hants, UK Tel: +44 1705 844285 Fax: +44 1705 844006 E-mail: mab@sis.port.ac.uk Date: 09/25/97 - Time: 14:11:59 URL http://www.sis.port.ac.uk/~mab/ ------------------------------------- From owner-parkbench-comm@CS.UTK.EDU Tue Oct 7 06:35:04 1997 Return-Path: Received: from CS.UTK.EDU by netlib2.cs.utk.edu with ESMTP (cf v2.9t-netlib) id GAA26560; Tue, 7 Oct 1997 06:35:04 -0400 Received: from localhost (root@localhost) by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id GAA25697; Tue, 7 Oct 1997 06:10:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: from osiris.sis.port.ac.uk (root@osiris.sis.port.ac.uk [148.197.100.10]) by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id GAA25668; Tue, 7 Oct 1997 06:09:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mordillo (pc297.sis.port.ac.uk) by osiris.sis.port.ac.uk (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA05125; Tue, 7 Oct 97 11:09:53 BST Date: Tue, 7 Oct 97 10:43:49 +0000 From: Mark Baker Subject: Workshop Papers To: "Aad J. van der Steen" , Charles Grassl , Clemens Thole , David Snelling , Erich Strohmaier , Grapham Nudd , Klaus Stueben , parkbench-comm@CS.UTK.EDU, Roger Hockney , Saini Subhash , Vladimir Getov , William Gropp X-Mailer: Chameleon ATX 6.0.1, Standards Based IntraNet Solutions, NetManage Inc. X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Dear All, I am now back in the office and have a small amount of time to follow up the Parkbench Workshop that took place a few weeks ago. I would firstly like to thanks everyone who attended - especially all the speakers. Even though we did not attract hundreds of delegates to the workshop, I think the event was very successful - but I may be bias... So, the plans are that in the first instance I will collect the slides from all the speaker and package them up and put them on the PEMCS Web site. We also decided that we would encourage all the speaker to produce short papers on their talks and put all the workshop paper together to create a special issue the the PEMCES journal. Can the speakers therefore send me their slides (I would prefer powerpoint or word version if possible). I will harrass you further about a short papers in the near future. Thanks in advance for your help. Regards Mark ------------------------------------- CSM, University of Portsmouth, Hants, UK Tel: +44 1705 844285 Fax: +44 1705 844006 E-mail: mab@sis.port.ac.uk Date: 10/07/97 - Time: 10:43:49 URL http://www.sis.port.ac.uk/~mab/ ------------------------------------- From owner-parkbench-comm@CS.UTK.EDU Sun Oct 12 09:55:57 1997 Return-Path: Received: from CS.UTK.EDU by netlib2.cs.utk.edu with ESMTP (cf v2.9t-netlib) id JAA28908; Sun, 12 Oct 1997 09:55:57 -0400 Received: from localhost (root@localhost) by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id JAA08800; Sun, 12 Oct 1997 09:44:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from osiris.sis.port.ac.uk (root@osiris.sis.port.ac.uk [148.197.100.10]) by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id JAA08793; Sun, 12 Oct 1997 09:44:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mordillo (p26.nas4.is2.u-net.net) by osiris.sis.port.ac.uk (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA11347; Sun, 12 Oct 97 14:45:07 BST Date: Sun, 12 Oct 97 14:35:10 +0000 From: Mark Baker Subject: Equivalent to comms1 To: parkbench-comm@CS.UTK.EDU X-Mailer: Chameleon ATX 6.0.1, Standards Based IntraNet Solutions, NetManage Inc. X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Can someone point me at the equivalant of comms1 written in C - either MPI or sockets (or even PVM if its out there). Cheers Mark ------------------------------------- Dr Mark Baker CSM, University of Portsmouth, Hants, UK Tel: +44 1705 844285 Fax: +44 1705 844006 E-mail: mab@sis.port.ac.uk Date: 10/12/97 - Time: 14:35:10 URL http://www.sis.port.ac.uk/~mab/ ------------------------------------- From owner-parkbench-comm@CS.UTK.EDU Mon Oct 13 16:30:04 1997 Return-Path: Received: from CS.UTK.EDU by netlib2.cs.utk.edu with ESMTP (cf v2.9t-netlib) id QAA17020; Mon, 13 Oct 1997 16:29:59 -0400 Received: from localhost (root@localhost) by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id QAA24297; Mon, 13 Oct 1997 16:02:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from dancer.cs.utk.edu (DANCER.CS.UTK.EDU [128.169.92.77]) by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id QAA24288; Mon, 13 Oct 1997 16:02:03 -0400 (EDT) From: Philip Mucci Received: by dancer.cs.utk.edu (cf v2.11c-UTK) id QAA02925; Mon, 13 Oct 1997 16:02:00 -0400 Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 16:02:00 -0400 Message-Id: <199710132002.QAA02925@dancer.cs.utk.edu> To: mab@sis.port.ac.uk, parkbench-comm@CS.UTK.EDU Subject: Re: Equivalent to comms1 In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: [XMailTool v3.1.2b] I would check out my mpbench on my web page.... It does PVM and MPI for now... > Can someone point me at the equivalant of comms1 written in > C - either MPI or sockets (or even PVM if its out there). > > Cheers > > Mark > > > ------------------------------------- > Dr Mark Baker > CSM, University of Portsmouth, Hants, UK > Tel: +44 1705 844285 Fax: +44 1705 844006 > E-mail: mab@sis.port.ac.uk > Date: 10/12/97 - Time: 14:35:10 > URL http://www.sis.port.ac.uk/~mab/ > ------------------------------------- > /%*\ Philip J. Mucci | GRA in CS under Dr. JJ Dongarra /*%\ \*%/ http://www.cs.utk.edu/~mucci PVM/Active Messages \%*/ From owner-parkbench-comm@CS.UTK.EDU Mon Oct 20 10:37:14 1997 Return-Path: Received: from CS.UTK.EDU by netlib2.cs.utk.edu with ESMTP (cf v2.9t-netlib) id KAA15359; Mon, 20 Oct 1997 10:37:14 -0400 Received: from localhost (root@localhost) by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id KAA07990; Mon, 20 Oct 1997 10:19:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from osiris.sis.port.ac.uk (root@osiris.sis.port.ac.uk [148.197.100.10]) by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (cf v2.9s-UTK) id KAA07691; Mon, 20 Oct 1997 10:17:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mordillo (pc297.sis.port.ac.uk) by osiris.sis.por