<div class="gmail_quote">Hi all,<div>For those of you who have experience running versions of Citcom on the Teragrid (specifically Lonestar and Ranger), I am seeking some insight/advice to help understand and minimize/eliminate (if possible) the longer runtimes I'm currently encountering on Ranger (vs. Lonestar). </div>
<div><br></div><div>I'm attaching a table summarizing timing results of a small test I've run using various combinations of the different compilers, compiler options, mpicc versions. This follows an earlier run on 480 processors resulting in a 20% longer runtime on Ranger vs Lonestar that first caused me to be aware of the difference.</div>
<div><br></div><div>I have gathered that because Lonestar has 4 cores/machine and Ranger has 16 cores/machine, the interconnect speed (Citcom uses interconnect heavily/is communications intensive?) may be limiting the speed despite Ranger being more powerful.</div>
<div><br></div><div>I would appreciate any shared experience, suggestions, or insights you may have to help identify the best machine and specifications to use for running Citcom.</div><div>Thank you!</div><div>Erin<div>
<br>-- <br>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~<br>Erin R. Burkett <br>University of California, Davis<br>2205 Earth and Physical Sciences<br>Davis, CA 95616<br><br><a href="http://mygeologypage.ucdavis.edu/burkett/" target="_blank">http://mygeologypage.ucdavis.edu/burkett/</a><br>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~<br>
</div></div>
</div><br>