RR -o OUT -n 16 './openmpi-mpirun /bin/sh -c "ulimit -s
unlimited ; ./wrf.exe " '
Could you give this a try?
Regards,
Jeroen Kleijer
On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 5:56 PM, Min Zhu wrote:
> Hi, Jeroen,
>
> Thanks a lot. Unfortunately I don't think I have got mpirun.lsf.
-s unlimited ; ./wrf.exe \" "
(at least I think you should :) )
The mpirun.lsf is a wrapper provided by LSF and the -a openmpi tells
it to set the necessary openmpi environment varibales etc.
Kind regards,
Jeroen Kleijer
On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 5:32 PM, Min Zhu wrote:
ting goes wrong and I'm trying to figure out where
Kind regards,
Jeroen Kleijer
On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 5:09 PM, Min Zhu wrote:
> Hi, Jeroen,
>
> Here is the OUT file, ERR file is empty.
>
> --
kind of curious what the error message is
you're seeing.
Kind regards,
Jeroen Kleijer
On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 4:41 PM, Min Zhu wrote:
> Hi, Jeroen,
>
> Thanks for your reply. I tried the command bsub -e ERR -o OUT -n 16
> "openmpi-mpirun /bin/sh -c 'ulimit -s unlimit
s to pass the whole string "openmpi-mpirun " to be
passed as a single string / command to LSF.
The second line between the single quotes is then passed as a single
argument to /bin/sh which is run by openmpi-mpirun.
Kind regards,
Jeroen Kleijer
On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 4:03 PM, Min Z
run
directly but use the mpirun.lsf, a wrapper script provided by LSF. This
wrapper script takes care of setting the necessary environment variables and
eventually calls the correct mpirun. (the option "-a openmpi" tells LSF that
we're using OpenMPI so don't try to autodetect)
to fail in Amazon's EC2.
However, if you're able to compile and use a version of the
development branch (1.3) you should be use compile and run the "hello
world" program without problems, regardless of the subnet they're in.
Regards,
Jeroen Kleijer
have absolutely _no_ idea
what it'll break but both solutions seem to work for me(tm) )
Regards,
Jeroen Kleijer
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 4:38 PM, Jeff Squyres wrote:
> Sorry for the delay in replying -- I thought I had replied to this already,
> but I guess I hadn't. :-(
>
> We
rounds for this.
If there are solutions to this I'd really like to know about it as
I've been trying this for quite a while now.
Regards,
Jeroen Kleijer
