HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: martin@xenon.stanford.edu (Martin C. Rinard)
Newsgroups: fj.mail-lists.parallel
Subject: Re: PVM: thoughts on data-passing routines
Date: 12 Aug 92 12:20:33 GMT
Distribution: fj

jek@cs.duke.edu (James E. Kittock) writes:

> While working on this, I have come to the conclusion that the C
> interface to PVM has a serious "want", namely, a routine to
> automagically put a structure and all of its contents, *including* the
> contents of any arrays/structures/unions pointed to by members of that
> structure.

  This is a standard problem in distributed systems. To recursively
pass a data structure between machines, you in general have
to pack recursively all the objects to which the first object points into a
message, then unpack the objects on the other side and reconstruct
the pointers. To pack an object given a pointer to that object, 
you need to know the type and size of the object. In general, 
it is impossible for a C program to get type and size information 
given only a pointer to an object. If you want to recursively pass
data structures between machines, you need to augment either the 
pointers or the data structures to which they point with type and 
size information. 

  Here at Stanford, we have developed a language called Jade that
supports the concept of an object which consists of several 
allocation units. The Jade frontend generates routines that 
recursively pack and unpack such objects, reconstructing the
pointers as necessary.  When the Jade implementation determines that
such an object needs to be passed from one machine to another, 
the sender calls the packing routines to put the data into a message,
then sends the message off to the receiver. The receiver then 
invokes the routines that unpack the object and reconstruct the
pointers. To support this functionality, the Jade memory allocators
augment allocated data with a type tag and a size tag. The packing
routines use these tags to determine how to pack and unpack the objects.

  So, such a scheme (in general) requires programming language support
beyond that which C provides. But, you can put the type and size tags
in by hand, and generate your own routines to pack and unpack the
data structures. 


  Martin
From: yufeng@cis.ksu.edu (Yufeng Li)
Newsgroups: fj.mail-lists.parallel
Subject: Distributed Scheduling
Date: 13 Aug 92 20:17:53 GMT
Distribution: fj

Does somebody have or know some papers
regarding distributed scheduling?  A survey is good enough.  
I may post a summary if needed. 
Thanks in advance.  

 Yufeng Li
From: dhd@exnet.co.uk
Newsgroups: fj.mail-lists.parallel
Subject: Re: Basic Question
Date: 17 Aug 92 14:04:04 GMT
Distribution: fj

In article <1992Aug14.121114.3814@hubcap.clemson.edu> hacksaw@cellar.org (Hacksaw) writes:
>   I apologize if this message is off-topic or idiotic, but... I was talking 
>to a friend who mentioned something about parallel computing. The idea that 
>more than one processor could be hooked together in one system and achieve 
>"super-speed". At work, he used a system(I forget the name) that had 
>4-parallel 386/25Mhz processors. It handled "animation" on a CAD program 
>called Jack with no trouble at all. I'm talking high-res images getting 
>flipped back and forth in no time. If this is what 4 386 processors can 
>achieve, then I'll be satisfied with what 2 286 processors can do.
> 
>   I'm currently running a 286/12 under MS-DOS. Obviously, I'm ready to 
>upgrade. I can pick up another 286 motherboard for under $100. Or would I 
>just need the 286 chip itself? Anyway... how would I go about hooking these 
>things together to achieve parallelism? What kind of software would support 
>it? MS-DOS seems to choke on even the itty-bittiest section of RAM above 
>640K; I don't know what makes me think it could handle another processor.
> 
>   Basically... Is parallel computing something only for the highest end 
>machines, or could it be achieved on a measly 286? Any comments would be 
>greatly appreiated. 

No, parallelism will soon be for the masses!  Technology is working its
way down from supercomputers through workstations to (even B^>) the x86
range.  That's not to say that microprocessors haven't been borrowing
supercomputing parallelism tricks like pipelining for years anyway...
Apparently the Intel 586 will have some direct hardware support for
multiprocessing in the easiest-to-understand form (shared memory).  And
the Sequent machines have been using 386/486 for years...

The main problem with chips not designed for multiprocessing (IMHO) is
that they don't believe the `no CPU is an island' philosophy, and so
are not particularly well suited to talking to other CPUs.  But there's
no reason in principle why you shouldn't use two or more 286s, none at
all.  Indeed, I have this secret wish to build a parallel m/c out of
Z80s...  The main problem is the size of the virtual memory space if
multiple processors are going to have to share it.  This is somewhat
more accute for the Z80 than the 286. B^>

Damon
-- 
Damon Hart-Davis | Tel/Fax: +44 81 755 0077 |1.22|| ALL MAIL FREE.
Internet: dhd@exnet.co.uk | Also: Damon@ed.ac.uk || US hotrod motor groups.
--------------------------+----------------------++ >12 mail&news polls / day.
Public access UNIX (Suns), news and mail for #5 per month.  FIRST MONTH FREE.
From: bernardl@cs.Stanford.EDU (Bernard Lee)
Newsgroups: fj.mail-lists.parallel
Subject: Re: Is the overhead of spin lock acquisition always significant?
Date: 19 Aug 92 12:22:16 GMT
Distribution: fj

In article <1992Aug18.111938.19628@hubcap.clemson.edu>, Ian Heavens <ian@spider.co.uk> writes:

|> This issue becomes important because multiple-reader/single-writer
|> locks are much more convenient to use, and reduce contention, at
|> a cost of increasing the overhead (three times that of a mutex lock?).
|> 
|> Are their cache consistency or other reasons to inflate the overhead
|> of testing and setting a memory location?  What have I missed?
|> 
|> Can someone suggest a rough equivalent for a spin lock acquisition in
|> terms of (some arbitrary mix of) instructions execution, where both 
|> instruction and data fetch are cache hits?

Try running some industrial CFD applications with writable global data 
(like the Barnes-Hut algorithm) on 100's of processors.  You will literally
see the machine comes to a halt...

Our experience on the Stanford DASH machine is that, when simulating
iPSC/860 functions such as those global gadd or gXXX functions, the 
contention can get so bad that a single instruction on a vector machine
can turns into 20,000+ instructions, all because of lock-spinning.
We end up having to redesign the algorithm.

It all comes down to how "real" your application is.

Regards,
  Bernard Lee, Stanford CS Dept.
From: cmcl2!vlsi3.ultra.nyu.edu!freudent@uunet.UU.NET (Eric Freudenthal)
Newsgroups: fj.mail-lists.parallel
Subject: Re: Is the overhead of spin lock acquisition always significant?
Date: 18 Aug 92 20:05:25 GMT
Distribution: fj

Ian,

In article <1992Aug18.111938.19628@hubcap.clemson.edu> Ian Heavens <ian@spider.co.uk> writes:

   Newsgroups: comp.parallel
From: zink@phoenix.informatik.uni-stuttgart.de (Roland Zink)
Newsgroups: fj.mail-lists.parallel
Subject: Re: PVM: thoughts on data-passing routines
Date: 17 Aug 92 14:04:04 GMT
Distribution: fj

In article <1992Aug11.121234.28784@hubcap.clemson.edu>, jek@cs.duke.edu (James E. Kittock) writes:
|> 
|> While working on this, I have come to the conclusion that the C
|> interface to PVM has a serious "want", namely, a routine to
|> automagically put a structure and all of its contents, *including* the
|> contents of any arrays/structures/unions pointed to by members of that
|> structure.

In my Stuttgart Parallel Processing Library (SPPL) this is possible.
The sending and receiving routines (sendd and recvd) have an
additional parameter which is a type description. Because the routine
for arbitrary graphs is not very efficient there exist two send
routines, one for data structures like trees and one for data
structures which contains cycles. DAG's can be send with the routine
for trees, but for each reference of an object there will be a copy of
the object. So you can send an arbitrary data structure with one
function call. The sendd function call is responsible for the
allocation of a message buffer, the copying of the scattered data into
this continous message buffer, the conversion of the data in a network
format and sending the message.

SPPL is a parallel processing library for distributed memory MIMD
computers and contains functions which can be used to send and receive
messages, start processes and synchronize etc. SPPL use a type
description of the message to collect the scattered data of the
message in a message-buffer and to convert the data to a network
format. The associated debugger use this information to display the
message in a readable format. This parallel debugger allows
interactive display and control of execution of SPPL programs. SPPL
uses currently TCP/IP to transfer messages.

--
Roland Zink Tel.:(0711)7816-382 email: Roland.Zink@informatik.uni-stuttgart.de
Univ. Stuttgart, IPVR, Breitwiesenstrasse 20, W-7000 Stuttgart 80, Germany
From: bernardl@SC.Stanford.EDU (Bernard Lee)
Newsgroups: fj.mail-lists.parallel
Subject: clarifications on iPSC/DASH/SGI library
Date: 13 Aug 92 20:19:01 GMT
Distribution: fj

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Clarifications about the status of the iPSC  message-passing  li-
brary on the DASH/SGI machines.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

(1)  We have successfully integrated FORTNET to the iPSC library,
but that part is NOT ready to be shipped yet.  An early announce-
ment was made as part of good research etiquette  so  that  other
researchers  can  plan  ahead.  The matter is in the hands of the
British researchers; the Stanford team is only supporting the in-
terface.   However,  Dr.  Robert  Allan at the SERC Daresbury Lab
(rja@cxa.dl.ac.uk) will still be glad to hear  from  you  if  you
just  want to send in an early registration of your interest.  My
apologies for the confusions in the earlier posting!

(2)  Just to follow Ms. Manner's research guidelines, perhaps  we
should  give some indications on the direction that we are taking
for the next major release.  We are planning to upgrade  the  li-
brary  to  socket-based  I/O, so that it will eventually run on a
network of 340VGX or 380VGX and simultaneously upgrade  the  per-
formance  on  DASH.   The entire idea is to compare the hardware-
driven performance on DASH to the software-driven performance  on
a  cluster of 340VGX under the same protocol.  The spin-off bene-
fit to the CS community is a socket-based iPSC library  that,  in
theory,  should  run  on  any  cluster  of  SGI's.   Since  there
shouldn't be too much architecture-dependent code in the library,
one  can  reasonably  expect  to  port the code to other types of
workstation clusters, although our group will not have  the  man-
power  to  support other architectures.  Anyone who is interested
in supporting other architectures should feel  free  to  send  me
mail  so that I can send you early versions of our "scratch" code
(and put everything under the same release).

(3)  We also welcome users to make "do-able" suggestions for  the
library, such as that of expanding the library to OSF/860.
From: stuebing@unipas.fmi.uni-passau.de (Andreas Stuebinger)
Newsgroups: fj.mail-lists.parallel
Subject: Nice drawing of petri nets
Date: 20 Aug 92 12:23:51 GMT
Distribution: fj

Hello,

(I already sent this to comp.sources.wanted, but got no reply, so I'm
trying comp.parallel and comp.graphics now.)

I'm looking for algorithms (best in C, Pascal, ...) to draw a given 
petri net (C/E or P/T) "nice", i.e. input is a list of nodes and edges. 
Output can be a nice drawing of the given net or calculated coordinates 
of all nodes. 

I'm interested in other petri net tools (i.e. analysis, editor, ...), too.

Does anybody has such algorithms and would you please respond by email.
Thanks a lot for any kind of help

Andreas
******************************************************************************
*  Andreas Stuebinger					Universitaet Passau  *
*  stuebing@trillian.fmi.uni-passau.de                   Tel.: 0851-509-779  *
******************************************************************************
From: ktl@wag.caltech.edu (Kian-Tat Lim)
Newsgroups: fj.mail-lists.parallel
Subject: Cubic grid problem
Date: 21 Aug 92 12:15:39 GMT
Distribution: fj


	I need a way to partition a physical three-dimensional space across a
mesh of nodes such that each node has as close to a cubic subdivision as
possible.  For example, x=53, y=26, z=44 distributed across 32 nodes should
give me 32 subdivisions of size x=13.25, y=13, z=11.  The exgrid* functions
in the Express software environment on the Intel Delta (our hardware target)
would split this (I think) as x=6.625, y=26, z=11, which is not acceptable for
the algorithm I need to use.

	If someone has come up with an efficient way of doing this or has a
reference, please let me know.

-- 
Kian-Tat Lim (ktl@wag.caltech.edu, KTL @ CITCHEM.BITNET, GEnie: K.LIM1)
Ex-System Manager, Materials & Molecular Simulation Center, Caltech
Henry Spencer left-of-|, Steve Lamont p*, Margaret "*" Puckette signature fan
From: hojungc@cs.man.ac.uk (Hojung Cha)
Newsgroups: fj.mail-lists.parallel
Subject: Crossbar switching chips - info needed
Date: 12 Aug 92 14:54:33 GMT
Distribution: fj

Apology if this is much out-of-date question.

As part of our multiprocessing hardware project, we are looking 
for some commercially available bit-parallel crossbar switching 
chips. So far we've found a couple of such chips; for instance, 
AMD's Am29C983 Multiple Bus Exchange chip and TI's 74ACT8841 
(I heard that the TI chip is now obsolete). Are there other such 
chips available in the market (or in the research lab) ?  
Any response will be much appreciated.

Regards,
Hojung Cha

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Hojung Cha
Dept. of Computer Science          Phone    : +44 61 275 6255
University of Manchester           Fax      : +44 61 275 6236
Manchester M13 9PL, U.K.           E-mail   : hojungc@cs.man.ac.uk
-------------------------------------------------------------------
From: heckler@microdesk3.ee.uni-sb.de
Newsgroups: fj.mail-lists.parallel
Subject: Wanted: Parallel algorithms for lattice basis reduction
Date: 12 Aug 92 12:21:37 GMT
Distribution: fj

I'm in research about parallel algorithms for 
basis reduction in lattices
("Given a basis B={b_1, ... , b_n} for a Lattice 
  L(B)={a_1*b_1 + a_2*b_2 + ... + a_n*b_n | with a_i integer for i=1...n},
  find another Basis
  B' which has shorter vectors.").

Therefore, I'm interested in papers about parallel algorithm
for basis reduction.

Can anybody give me some references?

Thank you very much
-- Christian

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Christian Heckler, Lehrstuhl fuer Mikroelektronik, Universitaet des
Saarlandes, W-6600 Saarbruecken, GERMANY
e-mail: heckler@ee.uni-sb.de
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: bi927@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Yi Jin)
Newsgroups: fj.mail-lists.parallel
Subject: Is there a table lookup utility for CM5?
Date: 20 Aug 92 12:23:37 GMT
Distribution: fj

It seems that CMSSL libraries for CM2 and CM5 are different. I used to
find that the table_lookup routine be very useful on CM2. However, when
I moved to CM5, its not there. Anyone have shcu a routine for CM5?

Thanks.
From: lycmit@x1sun6.ccl.itri.org.tw (Yin-Chih Lin)
Newsgroups: fj.mail-lists.parallel
Subject: Asking for demo program for PVM
Date: 18 Aug 92 20:05:34 GMT
Distribution: fj

Greetings:

I had installed the PVM (Parallel Virtual Machine) 2.4 on my SPARCstation
clusters. However, I have no good sense to write the parallel programs
for PVM in the beginning. This will prohibit me to make the impression
or convince of my colleagues to know the computing power of the
connected workstations.

So I solicit, if someone happens to write the programs (such as
scientific computations, graphic animations, data visualization
or anything else) which can demonstrate the PVM power when compared
with the single one computer will be so kind to drop me a note
about how to start. It will be highly appreciated if someone knows
any PD shareware for PVM can be obtained.

Any direction will be welcomed.

Thanks,

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Yin-Chih Lin                   Industrial Technology Research Institute (ITRI)
Design Eng.                    Computer & Communication Research Labs.  (CCL)
lycmit@x1sun6.ccl.itri.org.tw  Microcomputer System Department X100
Tel: 886-35-917331             14 Bldg, 195 Chung Hsing Rd., Section 4
Fax: 886-35-917503             Chutung, Hsinchu 31015
                               Taiwan, R.O.C. 
Disclaimer: I only speak for myself.
From: beaudoin@ireq-robot.hydro.qc.ca (Martin Beaudoin)
Newsgroups: fj.mail-lists.parallel
Subject: pvm vs p4
Date: 18 Aug 92 20:05:40 GMT
Distribution: fj

I would like to know the pros ans cons of using pvm rather than p4
over a network of Suns.

After browsing the documentation of both packages, I am under the
impression that they are both very similar.

Are there any noticable differences in the ease of programming or
speed of execution between the two??

I am planning to use one the package for my work on computer vision, so I
would like to receive any comments from anyone with some experience
with one or both packages.

Thank you!

--
Martin Beaudoin                         mbeaudoin@ireq-robot.hydro.qc.ca
Institut de recherche d'Hydro-Quebec    mbeaudoin@ireq-robot.uucp
Varennes, QC, Canada   J3X 1S1          +1 514 652-8136
From: vu0208@bingsuns.cc.binghamton.edu (!)
Newsgroups: fj.mail-lists.parallel
Subject: Re: Basic Question
Date: 19 Aug 92 19:25:49 GMT
Distribution: fj

In article <1992Aug18.111922.19431@hubcap.clemson.edu> mturner@aris.ss.uci.edu (Matthew Turner) writes:
>
>After reading the post entitled Basic Question, I found that I had a question
>of my own.  Is there a place where people trying to build experimental
>multi-processor systems out of off-the-shelf parts get together to compare
>notes?

See the Cosmic Cube machine built at Caltech by Chuck Seitz group.
Made out of i286 or i386 processors.
From: ojuarez@mtecv2.mty.itesm.mx (Octavio Juarez Espinosa)
Newsgroups: fj.mail-lists.parallel
Subject: About Connection Machine
Date: 14 Aug 92 18:30:30 GMT
Distribution: fj

Hi,

I'll appreciate if you send me information about Conection machine 5.

I am very interested in to do a comparison between SUN network  (high
speed networks) and CM/5.

The question is academic.
Thanks in advance.

Sincerely,

Octavio Juarez Espinosa
ojuarez@mtecv2.mty.itesm.mx

-- 
Octavio Juarez Espinosa
Gabriel Valerio 1134 
Saltillo, Coahuila    CP 25000
Mexico  email ojuarez@mtecv2.mty.itesm.mx
From: JSALAS@vmtecqro.qro.itesm.mx
Newsgroups: fj.mail-lists.parallel
Subject: Looking for IBM 9000 info
Date: 21 Aug 92 12:15:49 GMT
Distribution: fj

Hi everybody,
      Someone of you have the following information about IBM 9000:
   a) Architecture & price  & perfomance
   b) Software provided by IBM
   c) Special characteristics of the product.
   Thanks for your opinions,
                            Joaquin
jsalas at vmtecqro.qro.itesm.mx
From: marek@mel.dit.csiro.au (Marek T. Michalewicz)
Newsgroups: fj.mail-lists.parallel
Subject: (none)
Date: 19 Aug 92 12:22:08 GMT
Distribution: fj

Hello netters,

I have a basic and practical question. 
What is the recent thinking on random number generators on MPP systems?

My reference list is very limited

Knuth,
Numerical Recipies,
A. De Matteis & S. Pagnutti, Parallel Comp. 13 (1990) 193-198
T.A. Brody, Comp. Phys. Communications 56 (1989) 147-153

Do you know of some more current literature? Any good 
and more widely accepted algorithm?

I write in FORTRAN 90, (at the time being for MasPar). 
I want to have 16 K generators, each producing of the order of 
10^4 random numbers.
Has anyone solved such problem?

Any help much appreciated.

Marek Michalewicz
CSIRO Supercomputing Support Group
Div. of Information Technology
723 Swanston Street,
Carlton, Vic. 3053
Australia




--
*  Dr Marek T. Michalewicz                                                    *
*  Supercomputing Support Group, Division of Information Technology, CSIRO    *
*  723 Swanston Street, Carlton, Victoria 3053, Australia                     *
*  *tel: +61 3 282 2621 *Fax: +61 3 282 2600  *e-mail: marek@mel.dit.csiro.au *
From: lycmit@x1sun6.ccl.itri.org.tw (Yin-Chih Lin)
Newsgroups: fj.mail-lists.parallel
Subject: Where to find the IBM 3090 console emulator for Sun/IBM PC?
Date: 12 Aug 92 12:21:05 GMT
Distribution: fj

Greetings:

I would like to apologize in advance, if this is the wrong place to
post this mesage.

We just try to connect the Sun SPARCstations and IBM PCs to the 
IBM 3090 machine (50 miles away) through TCP/IP interconnections.
We can telnet/ftp to this IBM machine, however, some packages on
the machine required the 3090 console mode.

We try to figure out the ways for tailoring our workstations and PCs
to simulate the 3090 consoles, but fail. So we think, maybe someone
out there have the similar experience and would be kind enough to 
drop us the notes.

I recalled that some Supercomputer centers in USA did install the
IBM 3090 models (such as Cornell National Supercomputer Facility).
So I suppose maybe someone in these units did connect the Sun
workstations and IBM PC to their 3090 machines.

Any directions will be appreciated, please forward your notes to me
directly.

Thanks,


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yin-Chih Lin                   Industrial Technology Research Institute (ITRI)
Design Eng.                    Computer & Communication Research Labs.  (CCL)
lycmit@x1sun6.ccl.itri.org.tw  Microcomputer System Department X100
From: rdd@ukc.ac.uk (Rudnei Dias da Cunha)
Newsgroups: fj.mail-lists.parallel
Subject: Timing an application program under PVM
Date: 20 Aug 92 15:01:58 GMT
Distribution: fj

Dear colleagues,

I wonder if somebody who uses PVM could help me. I am having trouble
measuring the time taken by some application programs written in FORTRAN 77
and run on a network of SUN4s. 

Apparently the execution time returned by the function ``dtime'' is that of 
the application program only and is not including the time taken by the 
daemons to actually transfer the data. Any suggestions? Shall I use a
similar approach to that in the program ``timing.c'' that comes with PVM,
which uses the ``gettimeofday'' routine?

Thanks in advance!
--
                                    Rudnei Dias da Cunha
                                        rdd@ukc.ac.uk
                       Computing Lab, University of Kent at Canterbury
                          Canterbury, Kent  CT2 7NF, United Kingdom
From: qliu@shape.mps.ohio-state.edu (Quan Liu)
Newsgroups: fj.mail-lists.parallel
Subject: Domain Decomposition code on CM-2 Needed
Date: 14 Aug 92 12:10:32 GMT
Distribution: fj


        As stated in the subject,I try to use domain decomposition method to
solve some simple problems in CM-2. I will appreciate it if someone could send me
code in CM Fortran, or even Fortran 77.

        Thanks a  lot!


      Quan



-- 
  Quan  Liu                   Dept. of Mathematics
  Email: qliu@shape.mps.ohio-state.edu     Ohio State University
  Phone: work: (614) 292-3532         204 Cockins Hall