Re:Elemental: C++ library for distributed-memory linear alge...
by Gtifn on Monday December 28, 2015 @09:31PM
(#10804818)
How about dask's distrubted array? Do you know how the architecture and goals compare to Elemental?
Re:Elemental: C++ library for distributed-memory linear alge...
by math_and_stuff on Monday December 28, 2015 @10:38PM
(#10805049)
Distributed [1] is very new and seems to have similar core architectural goals as TensorFlow. But perhaps I'm being too politically correct: both make use of very course-grain parallelism relative to a typical distributed-memory linear algebra library (e.g., the current communication mechanisms of both are likely to be too course-grain to efficiently support distributed dense matrix inversion or eigensolvers; not that this is likely to be a design goal of either).
[1] http://matthewrocklin.com/blog/work/2015/06/23/Distributed/
Re:Elemental: C++ library for distributed-memory linear alge...
by Gtifn on Tuesday December 29, 2015 @12:11PM
(#10807641)
I think distributed's scheduler has seen much iteration since then and is now based on tornado. I wonder if that changes your assessment.
Also what do you think of Julia's native distributed capabilities and this library here: https://github.com/shashi/ComputeFramework.jl
Arguably the biggest weakness of Elemental is its lack of focus on dynamic scheduling at an intranodal level, though this can to a large degree be pushed into a local BLAS layer. One of the big items on my wish list would be proper integration of intranodal dynamic scheduling with the current high-performance internodal static scheduling.
The current TensorFlow releases seem to be primarily focused on intranodal dynamic scheduling; there has been a substantial amount of work in this area from the PLASMA [1] and (less recently) SuperMatrix [2] projects.
[1] http://icl.cs.utk.edu/plasma/ [2] http://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/flame/pubs/SuperMatrixTR.pdf