On Fri, 04 May 2012, Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Fri, 04 May 2012, TERRY DONTJE wrote:
> > Sorry if this is a stupid question but what is eth0:1 (it's under
> > eth0). Are the 172.16.30.X addresses pingable to each other?
>
> Yes. They're all on the same physical subnet.
Even though this might hav
Lets say I have a code like this
start = MPI_Wtime()
stop = MPI_Wtime();
What happens when right after start=MPI_Wtime(), the timeslice of the
process ( from the operating system's perspective not the MPI process) is
over, and the operating system schedules a next process, after saving the
conte
On Fri, 04 May 2012, TERRY DONTJE wrote:
> Sorry if this is a stupid question but what is eth0:1 (it's under
> eth0). Are the 172.16.30.X addresses pingable to each other?
Yes. They're all on the same physical subnet.
Don Armstrong
--
"People selling drug paraphernalia ... are as much a part
On 5/4/2012 1:17 PM, Don Armstrong wrote:
On Fri, 04 May 2012, Rolf vandeVaart wrote:
On Behalf Of Don Armstrong
On Thu, 03 May 2012, Rolf vandeVaart wrote:
2. If that works, then you can also run with a debug switch to
see what connections are being made by MPI.
You can see the connections
On Fri, 04 May 2012, Rolf vandeVaart wrote:
> On Behalf Of Don Armstrong
> >On Thu, 03 May 2012, Rolf vandeVaart wrote:
> >> 2. If that works, then you can also run with a debug switch to
> >> see what connections are being made by MPI.
> >
> >You can see the connections being made in the attached
On Fri, 04 May 2012, Jeff Squyres wrote:
> Double check that you have firewalls (e.g., iptables) disabled.
They are. [You can tell that they are by the tcpdump.]
Don Armstrong
--
It can sometimes happen that a scholar, his task completed, discovers
that he has no one to thank. Never mind. He w
On Fri, 2012-05-04 at 16:44 +0200, Eduardo Morras wrote:
> At 15:20 04/05/2012, you wrote:
> >Ups, I edited the code to make it easier to understand but I forgot
> >to change two p2, sorry ^^' .
> >I hope this one is completely right:
> >
> >1: for(int p1=0; p1 >2: for(int p2=0; p2 >3: if(me==p1)
At 15:20 04/05/2012, you wrote:
Ups, I edited the code to make it easier to understand but I forgot
to change two p2, sorry ^^' .
I hope this one is completely right:
1: for(int p1=0; p14: if(sendSize(p2))
MPI_Ssend(sendBuffer[p2],sendSize(p2),MPI_FLOAT,p2,0,myw);
//processor p1 sends data to
On 5/4/2012 8:26 AM, Rolf vandeVaart wrote:
2. If that works, then you can also run with a debug switch to see
what connections are being made by MPI.
You can see the connections being made in the attached log:
[archimedes:29820] btl: tcp: attempting to connect() to [[60576,1],2] address
13
Ups, I edited the code to make it easier to understand but I forgot to
change two p2, sorry ^^' .
I hope this one is completely right:
1: for(int p1=0; p125) cout<<"p1("<25) cout<<"p1("<25) cout<<"p2("<25) cout<<"p2("< At 11:52 04/05/2012, you wrote:
> >Hi all,
> >
> >I have a program that execute
At 11:52 04/05/2012, you wrote:
Hi all,
I have a program that executes a communication loop similar to this one:
1:for(int p1=0; p14:if(sendSize(p2))
MPI_Ssend(sendBuffer[p2],sendSize(p2),MPI_FLOAT,p2,0,myw);
5:if(recvSize(p2))
MPI_Recv(recvBuffer[p2],recvS
>-Original Message-
>From: users-boun...@open-mpi.org [mailto:users-boun...@open-mpi.org]
>On Behalf Of Don Armstrong
>Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2012 5:43 PM
>To: us...@open-mpi.org
>Subject: Re: [OMPI users] MPI over tcp
>
>On Thu, 03 May 2012, Rolf vandeVaart wrote:
>> I tried your program
A few nodes:
1. I think you posted an incorrect version of your code -- it's calling
MPI_Test on an uninitialized request.
2. This looks like a homework problem. I try very hard not to do peoples'
homework. :-) My first comment to you stands: you need to be more
fine-grained in your timing
Hi,
I haven't used the more mpi process also but still am still unable to
reduce my exection time.Here is my code *http://seshendramln.blogspot.se/*
and please help me in solving.
In this code iam getting the same execution time in i increase or decrease
the no.of nodes.
thanking you
With regard
Why? Removing the barrier will make all the other processors advance but
the processor that is waiting for the reception will wait forever.
Moreover, in the real code there is no Barrier. I use Isend's and
Irecv's and Wait's so I don't think that the problem is the Barrier.
I have tried to add "-m
Try removing the barrier.
On May 4, 2012, at 5:52 AM, Jorge Chiva Segura wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I have a program that executes a communication loop similar to this one:
>
> 1:for(int p1=0; p1 2:for(int p2=0; p2 3:if(me==p1) {
> 4:if(sendSize(p2))
> MPI_Sse
You probably need to be more fine-grained in your timing. Find out exactly
what is increasing in time. This is a common symptom for codes that do not
scale well -- i.e., adding more MPI processes actually causes it to slow down.
On May 3, 2012, at 7:48 AM, seshendra seshu wrote:
> Hi,
> I ha
Hello,
I think that my problem:
http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/users/2012/05/19182.php
is similar to yours. Following the advice in the thread that you posted:
http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/users/2011/07/16996.php
I have tried to run my program adding:
-mca btl_openib_flags 305
On May 3, 2012, at 2:02 PM, Jingcha Joba wrote:
> Not related to this question , but just curious, is Wtime context switch safe
> ?
Not sure exactly what you're asking here...?
--
Jeff Squyres
jsquy...@cisco.com
For corporate legal information go to:
http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_busin
Double check that you have firewalls (e.g., iptables) disabled.
On May 3, 2012, at 5:42 PM, Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Thu, 03 May 2012, Rolf vandeVaart wrote:
>> I tried your program on a single node and it worked fine.
>
> It works fine on a single node, but deadlocks when it communicates in
Hi all,
I have a program that executes a communication loop similar to this one:
1:for(int p1=0; p1
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 04:19:31PM -0400, Brock Palen wrote:
> To throw in my $0.02, though it is worth less.
>
> Were you running this on verb based infiniband?
Correct.
> We see a problem that we have a work around for even with the newest 1.4.5
> only on IB, we can reproduce it with IMB.
I
22 matches
Mail list logo
