back to article A single HPC-AI software environment is less desirable than you might think

Welcome to the latest Register Debate in which writers discuss technology topics, and you the reader choose the winning argument. The format is simple: we propose a motion, the arguments for the motion will run this Monday and Wednesday, and the arguments against on Tuesday and Thursday. During the week you can cast your vote on …

  1. msobkow Silver badge

    This is an interesting argument today. Particularly as I think the key point of such unified environments would be that they would have to be open source (likely Apache 2.0 or equivalent, or some variant on GPL/LGPL) so that the hardware vendors could implement the graph implementation systems that came up yesterday. You'd want the compute graphs to come in a platform neutral form, but there is all kinds of room for the vendor to apply their own optimization techniques and translation approaches for the output graph. It is only the graph intermediate form that needs to be standardized.

    I dare say that I'd rather trust teams of experts at optimization for a particular vendor's platform to do a better job at code tuning than I could ever do as a mere human being. Nor is there any limit to how many graphs can be chased down during the optimization process; you could, in theory, apply the optimization to the entire set of code that the OS will have in memory while the HPC evaluation is performed. After all, you are working with HPC hardware, so you can parallelize the bejeezus out of the optimization and end up taking a paltry fraction of the run time to do the transformation.

    Yes, that article on compute graphs really struck my fancy!

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022