Re: [AMBER-Developers] Suggestions for dealing with mpich2-1.2.1p1

From: Mark Williamson <>
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 09:30:28 -0700

Robert Duke wrote:
> Hi Mark,
> I had the same basic idea, but hesitate because it may have an impact as
> the processor count goes up somewhere north of 64 - hard to say; I would
> test it at like 256 on a high atom count system and see what happens
> there. The reason for the concern, off the top of my head - the extra
> copy in the master stalls the master a bit at all places this gets
> called, and that has the impact of stalling everybody else. I do
> realize this is a heck of a mess. I am not wildly passionate about GB
> performance (nobody has ever made it a real priority; if the amber
> community really wanted it superfast and I had funding to do it, I could
> make it a heck of a lot faster), so aside from a bit of
> pride-of-ownership and cringing over anything that slows pmemd down, I
> could probably let it go.

Ok, this is a good point. I'll get onto our Triton cluster later on
today and repeat that benchmark at higher process counts as indicated.
Is the size of the benchmark good for this testing or should I try
something else?



AMBER-Developers mailing list
Received on Fri Apr 16 2010 - 10:00:03 PDT
Custom Search