Reuti,
>-nolocal is IMO an option where you want to execute the `mpirun` on your
local login machine and want the MPI >processes to be allocated somewhere
in the cluster, in case you don't have any queuing system around to manage
>the resources.
yes, this is exactly my understanding of the -noloc
Am 27.07.2012 um 03:21 schrieb Ralph Castain:
> Application processes will *only* be placed on nodes included in the
> allocation. The -nolocal flag is intended to ensure that no application
> processes are started on the same node as mpirun in the case where that node
> is included in the allo
I see. Thank you both for the prompt replies.
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 8:21 PM, Ralph Castain wrote:
> Application processes will *only* be placed on nodes included in the
> allocation. The -nolocal flag is intended to ensure that no application
> processes are started on the same node as mpirun
Application processes will *only* be placed on nodes included in the
allocation. The -nolocal flag is intended to ensure that no application
processes are started on the same node as mpirun in the case where that node is
included in the allocation. This happens, for example, with Torque, where
I was under the impression that the -nolocal option keeps processes off the
submit
host (since there may be hundreds or thousands of jobs submitted at any
time,
and we don't want this host to be overloaded).
My understanding of what you said in you last email is that, by listing the
hosts, I
auto
Am 26.07.2012 um 23:58 schrieb Erik Nelson:
> Reuti,
>
> Thank you. Our queue is backed up, so it will take a little while before I
> can try this.
>
> I assume that by specifying the nodes this way, I don't need (and it would
> confuse
> the system) to add -nolocal. In other words, qsub wil
Reuti,
Thank you. Our queue is backed up, so it will take a little while before I
can try this.
I assume that by specifying the nodes this way, I don't need (and it would
confuse
the system) to add -nolocal. In other words, qsub will try to put the
parent node
somewhere in this set.
Is this the
Am 26.07.2012 um 23:48 schrieb Reuti:
> Am 26.07.2012 um 23:33 schrieb Erik Nelson:
>
>> I have a purely parallel job that runs ~100 processes. Each process has
>> ~identical
>> overhead so the speed of the program is dominated by the slowest processor.
>>
>> For this reason, I would like to r
Am 26.07.2012 um 23:33 schrieb Erik Nelson:
> I have a purely parallel job that runs ~100 processes. Each process has
> ~identical
> overhead so the speed of the program is dominated by the slowest processor.
>
> For this reason, I would like to restrict the job to a specific set of
> identic
I have a purely parallel job that runs ~100 processes. Each process has
~identical
overhead so the speed of the program is dominated by the slowest processor.
For this reason, I would like to restrict the job to a specific set of
identical (fast)
processors on our cluster.
I read the FAQ on -host
10 matches
Mail list logo