Due to the current gap in continued funding from the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF), the NSF Unidata Program Center has temporarily paused most operations. See NSF Unidata Pause in Most Operations for details.
Due to the current gap in continued funding from the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF), the NSF Unidata Program Center has temporarily paused most operations. See NSF Unidata Pause in Most Operations for details.
In message <3B886369.5E11697D@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Robert Mullenax writes: > s > > Yes this is what we saw. Maybe you can answer another question as I am new > to multi- > CPU > machines. Even with the non-SMP option compile a single GEMPAK script will > run slowe > r on the E6500 > than it will on an ordinary Ultra 10 (440Mhz vs. 400Mhz). If you look at top > while t > he script is > running on the E6500 you will see it "hopping" between CPUs..which of course > slows it > down. > Is there a way to prevent this? While the memory bus has a little more latentcy on the 6500 than the single CPU boxes, there is no way running on different CPUs should cause a noticeable performance impact on somthing like GEMPAK. What compiler options did you use to build gempack? Are you up-to-date with FORTE and Solaris patches? Are you using the same binary on the U10 and the 6500? Are the Solaris versions the same on both machines? How's the memory usage on both machines? -JEff
ldm-users archives: