I never used MPI before and now for my project in Julia I need to learn how to write my code in MPI and have several codes with different parameters run in parallel and from time to time send some data from each calculation to the other ones.
And I am absolutely blank how to do this in Julia and I never did it in any language before. I installed library MPI but didn't find good tutorial or documentation or an available example for that.
There are different ways to do parallel programming with Julia.
If your problem is very simply, then it might sufficient to use parallel for loops and shared arrays:
https://docs.julialang.org/en/v1/manual/parallel-computing/
Note however, you cannot use multiple computing nodes (such as a cluster) in this case.
To me, the other native constructs in Julia are difficult to work with for more complex programs and in my case, I needed to restructure (significantly) my serial code to use them.
The advantage of MPI is that you will find a lot of documentation of doing MPI-style (single-program, multiple-data) programming in general (but not necessarily documentation specific to julia). You might find the MPI style also more obvious.
On a large cluster it is also possible that you will find optimized MPI libraries.
A good starting points are the examples distributed with MPI.jl:
https://github.com/JuliaParallel/MPI.jl/tree/master/examples
Related
Are there any projects dealing with parallelism in Lisp land? I'm reading now the OpenMP's white papers and I'm convinced that this (or something very similar) must be the future of just any multi-purpose programming language.
I've searched the web for mentions of Common Lisp in relation to OpenMP but didn't find much. So, do you know of any project that would use Common Lisp in connection with data and task parallelism?
Just to give some sort of illustration of a feature I would imagine such library would provide:
(defprocess some-process
(<list of processes to inherit transactions from>)
(<list of transaction defs>)
(<process creation arguments>)
"<docstring>"
(accept
(some-transaction (<transaction arglist>) ...)
(some-other-transaction (...) ...))
...
(select ...))
I.e. it would be a framework for managing processes, which builds on top of multithreading.
I've researched both libraries mentioned by Lars Brinkhoff and here's very quick overview:
lparallel is a library based on another Lisp threading library, bordeaux-threads. It also implements some common functions based on threads (parallel reduce, map etc) as well as couple of macros (parallel let). It also has few new constructs such as parallel tree (a construct managing parallel executions + barriers of hierarchy of promises - basic building blocks of parallel semantics). The benefits, as I see them:
easier to use,
more portable,
incurs no penalty on the programmer who wants to exploit typical for Lisp long math, as well as Lisp-specific coding primitives, like for example, error handling.
mpi bindings. mpi by itself is a very low-level library. It builds upon semantics and limitations of C and Fortran languages making it difficult to adapt to Lisp. However, it probably performs better (I didn't run any tests yet), it is more low-level, and it comes with the framework for executing the code on clusters / networks of computers. It would be painstakingly difficult to pass around Lisp objects using this library. Even integers would present a major challenge because the library is very down-to-metal and deals with machine words rather then numbers. There are also problems running and debugging programs because mpi would start several instances of Lisp competing with each other for input and output...
I will try to set up a local network on my two machines and see if I can come up with a reasonable setup for this kind of parallel computing. Until then it looks like using lparallel is by far the easiest way to go about parallel programming in Lisp.
Not OpenMP, but two other libraries:
http://lparallel.org/
http://code.google.com/p/cl-mpi/
I am planning to write something to take advantages of the many devices that I have at home.
Basically my aim is to use the laptop to execute calculations, and also to use my main desktop computer to add more power (and finish the task quicker). I work with cellular simulation and chemical interactions, so to me would be great to take advantage of all that I have available at home.
I am using mainly OSX, so I need something that may work with that OS. I can code in objective-C, C and C++.
I am aware of GCD, OpenCL and MPI, but I am not sure which way to go.
I was planning to not use the full power of my desktop but only some of the available cores (in this way I can continue to work on the desktop doing other tasks that are not so resource intensive). In particular I would love to use the graphic card power (it is an ATI card, so no CUDA), since all that I do mainly is spreadsheet, word and coding with Xcode, and the graphic card resources are basically unused in that scenario.
Is there a specific set of libraries or API, among the aforementioned 3, that would allow me to selectively route tasks, and use resources on another machine without leaving the control totally to the compiler? I've heard that GCD is great but it has very limited control on where the blocks are executed, while MPI is on the other side of the spectrum....OpenCL seems to be in the middle.
Before diving in one of these technologies I would like to know which one would most likely suit my needs; I am sure that some other researcher has already used successfully parallel computing to achieve what I am trying to achieve.
Thanks in advance.
MPI is more for scientific computing large scale many processors many nodes exc not for a weekend project, for what you describe I would suggest using OpenCl or any one the more distributed framework of AMQP protocol families, such as zeromq or rabbitMQ, or a combination of OpenCl and AMQP , or even simpler consider multithreading , i would suggest OpenMP for that. I'm not sure if you are looking for direct solvers or parallel functions but there are many that exist as well for gpu's and cpu's which you can find on the web
Sorry, but this question simply cannot be meaningfully answered as posed. To be sure, I could toss out a collection of buzzwords describing various technologies to look at like GCD, OpenMPI, OpenCL, CUDA and any number of other technologies which allow one to run a single program on multiple cores, multiple programs on different cooperating computers, or a single program distributed across CPU and GPU, and it sounds like you know about a number of those already so I wouldn't even be adding much value in listing the buzzwords.
To simply toss out such terms without knowing the full specifics of the problem you're trying to solve, however, is a bit like saying that you know English, French and a little German so sure, by all means - mix them all together in a single paragraph without knowing anything about the target audience! Similarly, you can parallelize a given computation in any number of ways, across any number of different processing elements, but whether that parallelization is actually a win or not is going to be entirely dependent on the nature of the algorithm, its data dependencies, how much computation is expected for each reasonable "work chunk", and whether it can be executed on a GPU with sufficient numeric precision, among many other factors. The more complex the technology you choose, the more those factors matter and the greater the possibility that the resulting code will actually be slower than its single-threaded, single machine counterpart. IPC overhead and data copying can, and frequently do, swamp all of the gains one might realize from trying to naively parallelize something and then add additional overhead on top of that, resulting in a net loss. This is why engineers who can do this kind of work meaningfully and well are in such high demand. :)
Without knowing anything about your calculations, I would move in baby steps. First try a simple multi-processor framework like GCD (which is already built in to OS X and requires no additional dependencies to use) and figure out how to factor your code such that it can effectively use all of the available cores on a single machine. Once you've learned where the wins are (and if there even are any - if multi-threading isn't helping, multi-machine parallelization almost certainly won't either), try setting up several instances of the calculation on several machines with a simple IPC model that allows for distributing the work. Having already factored your algorithm(s) for multiple threads, it should be comparatively straight-forward to further generalize the approach across multiple machines (though it bears noting that the two are NOT the same problem and either way you still want to use all the cores available on any of the given target machines, so the two challenges are both complimentary and orthogonal).
This is not a question on specific technical coding aspect of MPI. I am NEW to MPI, and not wanting to make a fool of myself of using the library in a wrong way, thus posting the question here.
As far as I understand, MPI is a environment for building parallel application on a distributed memory model.
I have a system that's interconnected with Infiniband, for the sole purpose of doing some very time consuming operations. I've already broke out the algorithm to do it in parallel, so I am really only using MPI to transmit data (results of the intermediate steps) between multiple nodes over Infiniband, which I believe one can simply use OpenIB to do.
Am I using MPI the right way? Or am I bending the original intention of the system?
Its fine to use just MPI_Send & MPI_Recv in your algorithm. As your algorithm evolves, you gain more experience, etc. you may find use for the more "advanced" MPI features such as barrier & collective communication such as Gather, Reduce, etc.
The fewer and simpler the MPI constructs you need to use to get your work done, the better MPI is a match to your problem -- you can say that about most libraries and lanaguages, as a practical matter and argualbly an matter of abstractions.
Yes, you could write raw OpenIB calls to do your work too, but what happens when you need to move to an ethernet cluster, or huge shared-memory machine, or whatever the next big interconnect is? MPI is middleware, and as such, one of its big selling points is that you don't have to spend time writing network-level code.
At the other end of the complexity spectrum, the time not to use MPI is when your problem or solution technique presents enough dynamism that MPI usage (most specifically, its process model) is a hindrance. A system like Charm++ (disclosure: I'm a developer of Charm++) lets you do problem decomposition in terms of finer grained units, and its runtime system manages the distribution of those units to processors to ensure load balance, and keeps track of where they are to direct communication appropriately.
Another not-uncommon issue is dynamic data access patterns, where something like Global Arrays or a PGAS language would be much easier to code.
in many distributed computing applications, you maintain a distributed array of objects. Each process manages a set of objects that it may read and write exclusively and furthermore a set of objects that may only read (the content of which is authored by and frequently recerived from other processes).
This is very basic and is likely to have been done a zillion times until times until now - for example, with MPI. Hence I suppose there is something like an open source extension for MPI, which provides the basic capabilities of a distributed array for computing.
Ideally, it would be written in C(++) and mimic the official MPI standard interface style. Does anybody know anything like that? Thank you.
From what I gather from your question, you're looking for a mechanism for allowing a global view (read-only) of the problem space, but each process has ownership (read-write) of a segment of the data.
MPI is simply an API specification for inter-process communication for parallel applications and any implementation of it will work at a level lower than what you are looking for.
It is quite common in HPC applications to perform data decomposition in a way that you mentioned, with MPI used to synchronise shared data to other processes. However each application have different sharing patterns and requirements (some may wish to only exchange halo regions with neighbouring nodes, and perhaps using non-blocking calls to overlap communication other computation) so as to improve performance by making use of knowledge of the problem domain.
The thing is, using MPI to sync data across processes is simple but implementing a layer above it to handle general purpose distribute array synchronisation that is easy to use yet flexible enough to handle different use cases can be rather trickly.
Apologies for taking so long to get to the point, but to answer your question, AFAIK there isn't be an extension to MPI or a library that can efficiently handle all use cases while still being easier to use than simply using MPI. However, it is possible to to work above the level of MPI which maintaining distributed data. For example:
Use the PGAS model to work with your data. You can then use libraries such as Global Arrays (interfaces for C, C++, Fortran, Python) or languages that support PGAS such as UPC or Co-Array Fortran (soon to be included into the Fortran standards). There are also languages designed specifically for this form of parallelism, i,e. Fortress, Chapel, X10
Roll your own. For example, I've worked on a library that uses MPI to do all the dirty work but hides the complexity by providing creating custom data types for the application domain, and exposing APIs such as:
X_Create(MODE, t_X) : instantiate the array, called by all processes with the MODE indicating if the current process will require READ-WRITE or READ-ONLY access
X_Sync_start(t_X) : non-blocking call to initiate synchronisation in the background.
X_Sync_complete(t_X) : data is required. Block if synchronisation has not completed.
... and other calls to delete data as well as perform domain specific tasks that may require MPI calls.
To be honest, in most cases it is often simpler to stick with basic MPI or OpenMP, or if one exists, using a parallel solver written for the application domain. This of course depends on your requirements.
For dense arrays, see Global Arrays and Elemental (Google will find them for you).
For sparse arrays, see PETSc.
I know this is a really short answer, but there is too much documentation of these elsewhere to bother repeating it.
I want to answer questions about data in Erlang: count things, correlate messages, provide arbitrary statistics. I had thought about resorting to Hadoop for this but is it possible to build a solution in raw Erlang to do rather arbitrary data analysis not necessarily via map/reduce but somehow? I have seen some hints of people doing this but no explicit blog posts or examples of this being done. I know that Powerset's natural language capabilities are written in Erlang. I also know about CouchDB but was looking for some other solutions.
Yes.
For general-purpose computation and statistics, Erlang works just fine. It isn't optimized heavily for such work, so it will have trouble keeping up with similar numeric code in, say MatLab, ForTran, or any of the major C package for this work -- but for most uses it will do just fine. And of course if your code parallelizes neatly and you have multiple CPUs available, Erlang will catch up more easily.
(You also mentioned the map/reduce pattern; it is relatively trivial given the Erlang/OTP runtime and libraries.)
I and my colleagues have written plenty of "raw" Erlang to do counting, statistics, and so on. We have found it to be more than sufficient for most tasks.