[Swift-devel] Falkon and Coaster support for MPI

[Mihael Hategan]

On Mon, 2008-06-30 at 12:57 -0500, Ioan Raicu wrote:
> In the interest of productive arguing :)
> ...
> 
> But we have to prioritize our work!
> 
> I bet we could put a full time staff/student on surveying the state of 
> the art scheduling strategies and to implement that in Falkon/Coaster, 
> and it would likely take months (maybe more, if we find hurdles that our 
> environment is posing to us that others didn't face due to a more 
> general Linux environment) to do this task well.

That has no basis in anything, so not really "productive arguing".

> 
> I am willing to spend days on finding a solution for this, but anything 
> more, and I would have to say that its better to add MPI support to 
> Coaster (regardless of what I really believe).  If the goal is some 
> fancy scheduling algorithm (beyond the simple one I outlined), well I 
> can save myself a few days of work, and give you/Ben the token to start 
> working on MPI support in Coaster!

Thank you for the token. I didn't realize I needed one though.

> 
> Ioan
> 
> Mihael Hategan wrote:
> > On Mon, 2008-06-30 at 12:31 -0500, Ioan Raicu wrote:
> >   
> >> Comon Mihael, quit being so quick to argue :)\
> >>     
> >
> > I'm not sure what you mean. Arguments are not a bad thing. They are the
> > mechanism to clarify issues and solve problems. Arguing by exclusively
> > using rhetoric or not following logic much, on the other hand, is
> > probably not that useful.
> >
> > I was trying to point out that there are some recurring patterns when
> > moving from the single site batch job pattern to a multi site grid-like
> > pattern, and that there's little infrastructure to support that move.
> > But the problems themselves are there to stay, and won't go away if
> > ignored.
> >
> >   
> >> Adding MPI support might be easy, or hard, but it will certainly add 
> >> complexity to the scheduler that needs to support MPI.  If the user 
> >> community asks for this feature, we (Swift, Falkon, etc) would 
> >> eventually support it, but its not clear what priority this should take, 
> >> which partly depends on how hard it is to achieve the desired goal 
> >> (given all our limited resources and time).
> >>
> >> Ioan
> >>
> >> Mihael Hategan wrote:
> >>     
> >>>> I think we should be nervous about getting into the business of  
> >>>> implementing scheduler functionality like this.
> >>>>     
> >>>>         
> >>> That's funny. These are the problems we need to solve. We (Swift) are
> >>> pretty much suffering from nobody else in the grid world having done so.
> >>> I guess too many people were nervous.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>   
> >>>       
> >
> >
> >   
>