On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 09:02:23AM -0500, Rob Latham wrote:
> i'm not entirely sure what you're asking here. Most parallel I/O
> libraries carry out I/O to different regions of the file
> simultaneously (in parallel), and thereby extract more aggregate
> performance out of the storage system.
>
> for any application using any I/O library, the trickiest part is how
> to decompose your domain over N parallel processes and how to
> describe that decomposition.
To clarify: the way I see it, you can do parallel I/O in three different ways.
The first is to reserve a process which will only deal with I/O and other
process will exchange data to read/write with it.
The second is to have each process read/write independantly.
The third is to aggregate the I/O for several processes to improve performances.
So my question was: in practice, which approach does parallel netCDF use ?
> in strict performance terms -- which in the end is not really the
> be-all end all -- Argonne-Northwestern Parallel-NetCDF will be hard
> to beat, unless you are working with record variables.
Do you speak from personal experience ? I would be very interested in seeing
some data or benchmark about it.
--
Alexis Praga
_________________________________________________________
Ph.D Student
Aviation et Environnement
CERFACS
alexis.praga@xxxxxxxxxx
(33) 05 61 19 31 74
Attachment:
pgprcs1zu7WKc.pgp
Description: PGP signature
netcdfgroup archives: