In this section, we analyze the simulations conducted on various grid
configurations and for different sizes of the 3D Poisson problem. The parameters
of the network between clusters is fixed to $N2$ (see
In this section, we analyze the simulations conducted on various grid
configurations and for different sizes of the 3D Poisson problem. The parameters
of the network between clusters is fixed to $N2$ (see
In this section, the experiments compare the behavior of the algorithms running on a
speeder inter-cluster network (N2) and also on a less performant network (N1) respectively defined in the test conditions Table~\ref{tab:02}.
In this section, the experiments compare the behavior of the algorithms running on a
speeder inter-cluster network (N2) and also on a less performant network (N1) respectively defined in the test conditions Table~\ref{tab:02}.
increase of more than $75\%$ (resp. $82\%$) of the execution for the classical
GMRES (resp. Krylov multisplitting) algorithm. The execution time factor
between the two algorithms varies from 2.2 to 1.5 times with a network latency
increase of more than $75\%$ (resp. $82\%$) of the execution for the classical
GMRES (resp. Krylov multisplitting) algorithm. The execution time factor
between the two algorithms varies from 2.2 to 1.5 times with a network latency
presents a better performance in the considered bandwidth interval with a gain
of $40\%$ which is only around $24\%$ for the classical GMRES.
presents a better performance in the considered bandwidth interval with a gain
of $40\%$ which is only around $24\%$ for the classical GMRES.
size scale up. It should be noticed that the same test has been done with the
grid 4 $\times$ 8 leading to the same conclusion.
size scale up. It should be noticed that the same test has been done with the
grid 4 $\times$ 8 leading to the same conclusion.