Message boards : Number crunching : SixTrack and LHC@home status
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

Previous · 1 · 2

AuthorMessage
Profile Krunchin-Keith [USA]
Volunteer moderator
Project tester
Volunteer developer
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 2 Sep 04
Posts: 209
Credit: 1,482,496
RAC: 0
Message 23517 - Posted: 15 Oct 2011, 10:13:27 UTC - in response to Message 23515.  

Hello,
Do you have an estimated date for the GPU support for the LHC project? the gain in computation time will be phenomenal.

Thx

Read the first post in this thread.
ID: 23517 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Eric Mcintosh
Volunteer moderator
Project administrator
Project developer
Project tester
Project scientist

Send message
Joined: 12 Jul 11
Posts: 852
Credit: 1,619,050
RAC: 0
Message 23578 - Posted: 23 Oct 2011, 12:06:19 UTC

First, thankyou for all the feed back,and offers of help.
I shall be reviewing all this with Igor tomorrow I hope
(Massimo is absent for a week).

My current absolute priority is to check the physics results
from the new executables produced by Intel ifort. I had to
introduce rounding of the input data due to a strange 1 ULP
difference between ifort on Linux an Windows. I am
hoping, indeed praying, that the results will be valid.

If so, I can pass directly to producig new executables which
will allow for systems with/without SSE2. Should be possible.
I have my Mac but will produce a MAC version only after the
above issues are resolved. (I might also have problems to access
the ifort compiler for MAC as although CERN has an openlab
project with Intel I have to pay for a licence to debug the compiler!)

Then we can worry about credits and graphics, and many thanks to
Eric Myers for his detailed and constructive comments and to another
volunteer who offered to help implement them.

Well; I had hoped to be compiler independent by now, but .....
Only then can I think about GPUs. I had hoped by
May,then before the end of year, but it now looks lik next year, and
then I have to write it up and publish. Priority to getting
a high quality, well supported service (with graphics :-).

I will report soonest on the result of the physics checks. Eric
ID: 23578 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
diederiks

Send message
Joined: 25 Jul 05
Posts: 19
Credit: 507,287
RAC: 2
Message 23599 - Posted: 30 Oct 2011, 12:57:02 UTC - in response to Message 23578.  

Any progress on the physics checks? the .09 version did run a lot faster on my machines that have sse2.
ID: 23599 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Eric Mcintosh
Volunteer moderator
Project administrator
Project developer
Project tester
Project scientist

Send message
Joined: 12 Jul 11
Posts: 852
Credit: 1,619,050
RAC: 0
Message 23676 - Posted: 10 Nov 2011, 11:42:31 UTC

Well I have been on vacation since 1st November but
still trying to do what I can. (The sunshine makes
it difficult to read the screen on my netbook! :-)
In addition the simple putty service often hangs or
breaks the connection to CERN which is very frustrating.
I therefore am using batch jobs instead of just running
scripts to submit work and get results back. Further
the CERN services are very busy and evrything is rather
slow.

I am trying to run a series of studies lhc300/400/500 which we
have already run on LSF batch at CERN. The goal is to dtermine
if the physics results are valid using the new SixTrack, the
new ifort compiler and the new DBL(SNGL()) of input data.
These jobs are "only" 10,000 turns and many cases are unstable.
Hence the shorter execution times. I cannot submit work fast
enough either. I am supposed to produce the procedures for
physics verification but I am stymied since I have no X-windows
and cannot check my gnuplot scripts. That will have to wait until
I return to CERN on 15th November.

I will also try and agree with Igor an rcp type system for
submitting jobs and retrieving results which will be much more
efficient and avoid using intermediate AFS buffers. Also if I
can get agreement I would set up a dedicated machine (or two)
for the physicists to use. AFS would be used for the scripts but
everything else would be on a say 1 Terabyte local disk system.

I have produced a new executable which uses SSE2 if available
and I am reviewing with Intel. It would be great if somebody has
an old Pentium 3 machine (NO SSE2) Linux so we could check it
works on "any" PC. I cannot use Windows at CERN remotely so that
too will have to await the end of my vacation.

Maybe I shall manage to progress on compiler independence. My personal
goal of 0ULP on any IEEE machine with any Fortran compiler at any
optimisation might get closer. I think this is vital because I can
then be sure we have no compiler bugs affecting results and I can
send convincing e-mails to you when results are treated as invalid.

I haven' forgotten the MACs. I'll try and produce that executable as well
at CERN.

A lot depends on finding an acceptable solution to the formatted I/O
problems. I am more and more thinking I shall have to use C++ strtod()
decimal to binary conversion as I can't wait for 2003 standard
compliant compilers. Still maybe the DBLE/SNGL() workround will be
satisfactory even if inelegant.

I haven't forgotten graphics; just can't do everything right now.

Thanks for all your support and patience. Please understand that there
may be a pause in the work submission while all this is sorted out.
There is no point in submitting million turn jobs and LHC upgrade studies
until we are confident in the results. Eric.

ID: 23676 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Eric Mcintosh
Volunteer moderator
Project administrator
Project developer
Project tester
Project scientist

Send message
Joined: 12 Jul 11
Posts: 852
Credit: 1,619,050
RAC: 0
Message 23678 - Posted: 10 Nov 2011, 11:44:46 UTC - in response to Message 23599.  

Workingon it. I think I have it OK now
Versin 4311 but I am reviewing with Intel
next week- Eric.
ID: 23678 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile MAGIC Quantum Mechanic
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 24 Oct 04
Posts: 949
Credit: 40,383,999
RAC: 5,037
Message 23680 - Posted: 10 Nov 2011, 11:55:53 UTC - in response to Message 23678.  

Thanks Eric,

Don't worry about the graphics....the LHC is more important.
We are always ready for a new batch of tasks here.

(btw it is 4am here so I'm having no trouble with the sun shining through the window here )



Volunteer Mad Scientist For Life
ID: 23680 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Zapped Sparky

Send message
Joined: 22 Oct 08
Posts: 26
Credit: 75,214
RAC: 0
Message 23681 - Posted: 11 Nov 2011, 4:59:21 UTC

Thanks for the update Eric, even though a lot of it went over my head :) Hope your having a good holiday!
ID: 23681 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Profile jujube

Send message
Joined: 25 Jan 11
Posts: 179
Credit: 83,858
RAC: 0
Message 23683 - Posted: 11 Nov 2011, 11:21:39 UTC - in response to Message 23676.  

Maybe I shall manage to progress on compiler independence. My personal
goal of 0ULP on any IEEE machine with any Fortran compiler at any
optimisation might get closer. I think this is vital because I can
then be sure we have no compiler bugs affecting results and I can
send convincing e-mails to you when results are treated as invalid.


Achieving 0ULP across all Fortran compilers is a worthy goal from an academic perspective and you've done very well in that regard. However, from a practical perspective it makes more sense to run exactly the same version of Sixtrack on all platforms by running it in a virtual machine. Test4Theory uses that approach and it works very well. Another benefit of using a virtual machine is that you wouldn't have to make a version for OS X and people running BSD could crunch Sixtrack too.

ID: 23683 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Toby Broom
Volunteer moderator

Send message
Joined: 27 Sep 08
Posts: 598
Credit: 374,550,979
RAC: 32,167
Message 23685 - Posted: 11 Nov 2011, 12:32:10 UTC

The oldest CPU I have is a pentium 4.

Maybe it would be easier to find someone with an Athlon XP/MP or Duron/Sempron as AMD didn't implament SSE2 until a few years after Intel.

ID: 23685 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
m

Send message
Joined: 6 Sep 08
Posts: 110
Credit: 6,735,343
RAC: 422
Message 23686 - Posted: 11 Nov 2011, 13:41:21 UTC
Last modified: 11 Nov 2011, 13:46:22 UTC

Eric,

I have two hosts running SixTrack without sse2. However, they're both running Win2k not Linux. This one is a Pentium 3, and this one a Pentium 4.

Thanks for the updates, they're much appreciated, even if I don't understand a lot of it.

John.
ID: 23686 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Mattia Verga

Send message
Joined: 27 Sep 04
Posts: 20
Credit: 23,880
RAC: 0
Message 23688 - Posted: 12 Nov 2011, 16:45:56 UTC - in response to Message 23676.  

It would be great if somebody has
an old Pentium 3 machine (NO SSE2) Linux so we could check it
works on "any" PC.

I have an old motherboard with Socket A CPU (I don't remember if under the fan there's an Athlon or a Duron) that support only SSE (no SSE2). If it can be useful I can find some pieces to build a PC on the fly and install a Linux onto that.
ID: 23688 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Henry Nebrensky

Send message
Joined: 13 Jul 05
Posts: 123
Credit: 13,500,645
RAC: 3,329
Message 23693 - Posted: 14 Nov 2011, 19:19:30 UTC - in response to Message 23685.  

I have a bunch of AthlonXP/Sempron boxes already running Linux (SLC4)... and a Pentium II, if 10 000 turns is a good enough test!
ID: 23693 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Mattia Verga

Send message
Joined: 27 Sep 04
Posts: 20
Credit: 23,880
RAC: 0
Message 23904 - Posted: 3 Mar 2012, 16:35:34 UTC - in response to Message 23678.  

A lot of time passed since last update... any news on developing the new client version? The 530.10 is really slow :-(


Thanks
ID: 23904 · Report as offensive     Reply Quote
Previous · 1 · 2

Message boards : Number crunching : SixTrack and LHC@home status


©2020 CERN