Re: SCHED_ULE should not be the default

On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 09:06:04AM -0800, Steve Kargl wrote:
> Tuning kern.sched.preempt_thresh did not seem to help for
> my workload.  My code is a classic master-slave OpenMPI
> application where the master runs on one node and all
> cpu-bound slaves are sent to a second node.  If I send
> send ncpu+1 jobs to the 2nd node with ncpu's, then 
> ncpu-1 jobs are assigned to the 1st ncpu-1 cpus.  The
> last two jobs are assigned to the ncpu'th cpu, and 
> these ping-pong on the this cpu.  AFAICT, it is a cpu
> affinity issue, where ULE is trying to keep each job
> associated with its initially assigned cpu.
> 
> While one might suggest that starting ncpu+1 jobs
> is not prudent, my example is just that.  It is an
> example showing that ULE has performance issues. 
> So, I now can start only ncpu jobs on each node
> in the cluster and send emails to all other users
> to not use those node, or use 4BSD and not worry
> about loading issues.

Does it meet your expectations if you start (j modulo ncpu) = 0
jobs on a node?

-- 
Scott Lambert                    KC5MLE                       Unix SysAdmin
lambert@lambertfam.org

_______________________________________________
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"