Re: Parallel Common-Lisp with at least 64 processors?

From: "Alex Mizrahi" <udode...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
i think what Robert does can be just launched in multiple
processes, even on different machines.

Yes, but I was wondering if any existing Lisp implementation
provided a way specify a parallel MAPCAR which would then be
automatically distributed per some configuration that had been set
up previously. For example, a cooperative set of CPUs might be in
an arrangement whereby whenever one of them wants to run a burst of
parallel computation and the others have some idle time then
FORK-MAPCAR automatically distributes across all the CPUs. Of
course for this to be practical they must all be physically located
close together so that the master algorithm can be quickly
distributed onto all the CPUs (or accessed in real time by shared
memory bus).

For launching on multiple machines connected across the InterNet,
like the way SETI@home is done, I don't imagine FORK-MAPCAR being
practical. Instead, only a small set of algorithms would be
pre-distributed to the various hosts, and each such host registered
as now available to run that particular algorithm, and then when
there's a task to be done in parallel the parallel sub-tasks would
be sent out per that registry.

Robert is just too lazy to implement this, so he want's support
in core language.

That's an extremely hostile/nasty thing for you to say about
somebody you've never met in person. You have no idea how much work
I do, without pay, to accomplish various major processing tasks.

I was simply inquiring whether any *one* (1) person might have
access to a single multi-CPU with such auto-distributing software
up&running and available for occasional use by outsiders when not
otherwise busy. That seemed a more reasonable request than to ask
hundreds of different people to *each* volunteer their single-CPU
servers to join me in building a brand-new protocol for
distributing software for such tasks and maitaiing a registery of
which hosts have which software and which hosts are available at
any given time and distributing tasks via this new protocol we've
invented. But if you think asking for hundreds of volunteers to
work with me on a new protocol would be a more reasonable request,
so be it.

(also he could get a speedup from just faster CPU. probably some
modern 4-core Xeon would be not much worse than a rusty 64-CPU
machine or that Niagara monster)

Well if *one* person has access to a CPU that is several orders of
magnitude faster than the Intel processor used by a commercial ISP,
and would be willing to let me use it from time to time to see how
much faster it is at the kinds of tasks I have in mind, I'd be
willing to give that a try too. But that really doesn't scale well,
compared to more CPUs running in parallel. If I want to tackle
processing a batch of a hundred million records at a time, I really
don't think any single CPU or even quad-CPU that fast exists at
all.

i doubt there's huge need in parallelism support in core
language. most likely parallel:mapcar implemented in library will
do just fine.

My wording must have been unclear. parallel:mapcar in a library,
using some super-efficient built-in mechanism for forking on
64-core computer, would satisfy my query just fine. But
parallel:mapcar in a library without any support for efficient
threads in the underlying CL would probably not work well.

3. ABCL should work fine on niagaras, since it uses underlying
JVM threading

What's the largest number of available CPUs ("cores") that anybody
in this newsgroup has available for playing around with this sort
of thing using ABCL?

4. SBCL and SCL might work too

Same question for SBCL and SCL.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: PII vs PIII
    ... >> What CPUs were in those machines and what did you use them for Lane? ... >> breaking the pins off CPUs, a move always seen as being irreversible. ... I managed to break off the wrong pin. ...
    (comp.os.linux.hardware)
  • Re: When a computer start
    ... it's reasonable for non-PC machines to have either a gated register ... or a tiny ROM or even a CMOS-RAMon top of the memory range. ... At least AMD64 work the same way as 32-bit CPUs on RESET. ...
    (alt.lang.asm)
  • Re: Need help to reanimate an AT&T AT&T 3B1/7300 UNIX-PC
    ... There was only one Sun that I can recall. ... Ultra-60s (dual 450 MHz CPUs) as my desktop machine. ... which are 64-bit machines native -- with the ability to run ... That is part of my first unix box -- a Cosmos CMS/UNX running on an 8 ...
    (comp.sys.3b1)
  • Re: a dozen cpus on a chip
    ... This will make it a lot harder to say how many CPUs are in a chip. ... SMPs cost much more than loosely-coupled machines, but there are good commercial reasons to use them. ... Keeping the illusion of symmetric shared memory really simplifies the programming model--a hugely important issue that non-programmers usually have no idea about. ... Ever since Danny Hillis & Co. back in the 80s, people have been pushing one sort or another of massively parallel machine. ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
  • Re: [Lse-tech] [patch] sched-domain cleanups, sched-2.6.5-rc2-mm2-A3
    ... unportable across machines and OSes. ... I suppose the reason are the 1-2 helper threads which are started ... together with the worker threads. ... On small machines (and 4 cpus is small) they significantly disturb ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
Loading