Paper detail

MPI Derived Datatypes: Performance Expectations and Status Quo

We examine natural expectations on communication performance using MPI derived datatypes in comparison to the baseline, "raw" performance of communicating simple, non-contiguous data layouts. We show that common MPI libraries sometimes violate these datatype performance expectations, and discuss reasons why this happens, but also show cases where MPI libraries perform well. Our findings are in many ways surprising and disappointing. First, the performance of derived datatypes is sometimes worse than the semantically equivalent packing and unpacking using the corresponding MPI functionality. Second, the communication performance equivalence stated in the MPI standard between a single contiguous datatype and the repetition of its constituent datatype does not hold universally. Third, the heuristics that are typically employed by MPI libraries at type-commit time are insufficient to enforce natural performance guidelines, and better type normalization heuristics may have a significant performance impact. We show cases where all the MPI type constructors are necessary to achieve the expected performance for certain data layouts. We describe our benchmarking approach to verify the datatype performance guidelines, and present extensive verification results for different MPI libraries.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.