[Paraview] Paraview and Multicore
Guido Staub
gstaub at udec.cl
Wed May 19 05:49:39 EDT 2010
So, with D3 things run faster now. Solved as well the mentioned
problem, it was due to not scaling the z values. However, maybe a
logical behaviour, the result of the triangulation now consists of
four tiles. Anybody knows how to for example connect them? I have
attached a screenshot showing the separation (vertical lines) of the
tiles.
Guido
Am Tue, 18 May 2010 17:17:06 +0000 schrieb Guido Staub <gstaub at udec.cl>:
> Using Process ID Scalars results in an Data Array ProcessId which in
> case of np 3 ranges from 0 to 2 (and from 0 to 3 in case of np 4). I
> have selected colorBy ProcessID to see if the input is well balanced
> or not, unfortunately all the points have the same color. So I
> conclude that the data is not well balanced, right?
>
> If I apply the D3 filter I almost see the same results. The only
> difference I have noticed is that there is no new Data Array.
>
> Delaunay 2D is now about three times faster after I applied D3 filter.
> However I do not like the resulting triangulation, seems like some
> isosurfaces have been calculted.
>
> Guido
>
> Am Thu, 13
> May 2010 20:48:11 -0400 schrieb Andy Bauer <andy.bauer at kitware.com>:
>
> > Process Id Scalars doesn't do any load balancing, it just shows what
> > cells are assigned to what process. You can try the D3 filter to do
> > actual load-balancing (your reader may already be doing this though
> > in which case you would see the same results from a Process Id
> > Scalars filter used after the D3 filter). I'm not that familiar
> > with the internals of Delauney2D for distributed points but it's
> > quite possible that for the set of points you have that the
> > partitioning is not appropriate. As Ken said, using the Process Id
> > Scalars to see if the input is fairly well balanced.
> >
> > Andy
> >
> > On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 3:33 PM, Guido Staub <gstaub at udec.cl> wrote:
> >
> > > Process Id Scalars didn't do the trick, still no performance gain
> > > with Delaunay 2D.
> > > My data is stored in a h5 file which gets loaded through a xdmf
> > > file. After running the Process Id Scalars filter I do not see any
> > > changes in the distribution of the data. However I guess that they
> > > are already "evenly distributed" by default.
> > >
> > > So maybe exporting the file to an other format will do it or is
> > > there a problem with the Delaunay implementation in general when
> > > running in parallel?
> > >
> > > Guido
> > >
> > > Am Thu, 13 May 2010 15:08:04
> > > -0600 schrieb "Moreland, Kenneth" <kmorel at sandia.gov>:
> > >
> > > > Ah, I see. It sounds like your data is not balanced. Many of
> > > > the "non parallel" file formats will do something stupid when
> > > > loading data in parallel. For example, they might load
> > > > everything on process 0 or load everything everywhere. (And
> > > > now that I think about it, the Delaunay filter may have trouble
> > > > in parallel.)
> > > >
> > > > Try running the "Process Id Scalars" filter on your data. Do
> > > > the points look evenly distributed?
> > > >
> > > > -Ken
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 5/13/10 10:17 AM, "Guido Staub" <gstaub at udec.cl> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Well if I start pvserver by mpirun -np 4 pvserver I have 3 cores
> > > > running at almost 100%. Now I connect to the server and start a
> > > > Delaunay 2D calculation on one of my datasets. As a result all
> > > > of the 4 cores are showing 100%. However I assume that there is
> > > > only one core doing the job, because on the one hand
> > > > calculation is really slow. I have done similar processing on
> > > > an other PC (an outdated one) and there is no significant
> > > > performance advantage as one would expect. And on the other
> > > > hand, running pvserver with e.g. -np 2 results in 100% for 2
> > > > CPUs when starting the Delaunay 2D calc (1 core at 100% when
> > > > cpu is idle).
> > > >
> > > > Guido
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Am Thu, 13 May 2010
> > > > 12:39:43 -0600 schrieb "Moreland, Kenneth" <kmorel at sandia.gov>:
> > > >
> > > > > I am afraid I simply don't understand the question. You said
> > > > > in (1) that you have three cores running at 100%. Then in (2)
> > > > > you said that you only have one core running. Is it happening
> > > > > when you start the client, connect the client to the server,
> > > > > launch the server from the client, or something else? Is
> > > > > something running or is the client sitting idle waiting for
> > > > > the user?
> > > > >
> > > > > -Ken
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On 5/13/10 8:15 AM, "Guido Staub" <gstaub at udec.cl> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks Ken, but I have already read this thread, therefore I
> > > > > started the client process anyway without taking care of cpu
> > > > > usage for now.
> > > > >
> > > > > However my second question still keeps me busy. Isn't it
> > > > > possible to use all 4 cores?
> > > > >
> > > > > Guido
> > > > >
> > > > > Am Thu, 13 May 2010
> > > > > 10:29:13 -0600 schrieb "Moreland, Kenneth"
> > > > > <kmorel at sandia.gov>:
> > > > >
> > > > > > The question about why the pvserver processes are always at
> > > > > > 100% CPU comes up frequently on the mailing list (such as
> > > > > > http://www.paraview.org/pipermail/paraview/2008-December/010338.html
> > > ).
> > > > > > I've added some information to the Wiki about it to provide
> > > > > > an explanation:
> > > > > >
> > > http://www.paraview.org/Wiki/Setting_up_a_ParaView_Server#Server_processes_always_have_100.25_CPU_usage
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -Ken
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 5/13/10 5:06 AM, "Guido Staub" <gstaub at udec.cl> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I have succesfully compiled Paraview with MPI support on my
> > > > > > Workstation (Quad Core). I have read that paraview runs
> > > > > > serial, pvserver parallel, so I started the server by mpirun
> > > > > > -np 4 pvserver and connected through X. Everything seems to
> > > > > > work fine.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > But there are two strange behaviours I have noticed:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 1. CPU usage on workstation is almost 100% on three of the
> > > > > > four cores although no client is connected (when I type
> > > > > > mpirun -np 3 pvserver there are 2 out of 4 running at 100%;
> > > > > > with -np 2 only 1). I have noticed this using MPICH2 and
> > > > > > OpenMPI.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 2. When I now start a client process the server uses only
> > > > > > one core (-np 4/3/2/1). Why?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Does MPI not work on multicore systems as on multiprocessor
> > > > > > systems or is this a Paraview issue?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > Guido
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > Powered by www.kitware.com
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Visit other Kitware open-source projects at
> > > > > > http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Please keep messages on-topic and check the ParaView Wiki
> > > > > > at: http://paraview.org/Wiki/ParaView
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe:
> > > > > > http://www.paraview.org/mailman/listinfo/paraview
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > **** Kenneth Moreland
> > > > > > *** Sandia National Laboratories
> > > > > > ***********
> > > > > > *** *** *** email: kmorel at sandia.gov
> > > > > > ** *** ** phone: (505) 844-8919
> > > > > > *** web:
> > > > > > http://www.cs.unm.edu/~kmorel<http://www.cs.unm.edu/%7Ekmorel>
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > **** Kenneth Moreland
> > > > > *** Sandia National Laboratories
> > > > > ***********
> > > > > *** *** *** email: kmorel at sandia.gov
> > > > > ** *** ** phone: (505) 844-8919
> > > > > *** web:
> > > > > http://www.cs.unm.edu/~kmorel<http://www.cs.unm.edu/%7Ekmorel>
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > **** Kenneth Moreland
> > > > *** Sandia National Laboratories
> > > > ***********
> > > > *** *** *** email: kmorel at sandia.gov
> > > > ** *** ** phone: (505) 844-8919
> > > > *** web:
> > > > http://www.cs.unm.edu/~kmorel<http://www.cs.unm.edu/%7Ekmorel>
> > > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Powered by www.kitware.com
> > >
> > > Visit other Kitware open-source projects at
> > > http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html
> > >
> > > Please keep messages on-topic and check the ParaView Wiki at:
> > > http://paraview.org/Wiki/ParaView
> > >
> > > Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe:
> > > http://www.paraview.org/mailman/listinfo/paraview
> > >
> _______________________________________________
> Powered by www.kitware.com
>
> Visit other Kitware open-source projects at
> http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html
>
> Please keep messages on-topic and check the ParaView Wiki at:
> http://paraview.org/Wiki/ParaView
>
> Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe:
> http://www.paraview.org/mailman/listinfo/paraview
>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: screenshot.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 55147 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://www.paraview.org/pipermail/paraview/attachments/20100519/70c7e38f/attachment-0001.jpg>
More information about the ParaView
mailing list