Re: [OMPI users] MPI_Comm_accept()

Thanks! I've been working around this in the meantime but will look forward to using it in 3.0. On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 4:02 PM, r...@open-mpi.org wrote: > Hardly the hoped-for quick turnaround, but it has been fixed in master and > will go into v3.0, which is planned for release in the near fu

Re: [OMPI users] MPI_Comm_accept()

Hardly the hoped-for quick turnaround, but it has been fixed in master and will go into v3.0, which is planned for release in the near future > On Mar 14, 2017, at 6:26 PM, Adam Sylvester > wrote: > > Excellent - I appreciate the quick turnaround. > > On Tue, Mar 14, 2

Re: [OMPI users] MPI_Comm_accept()

Excellent - I appreciate the quick turnaround. On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 10:24 AM, r...@open-mpi.org wrote: > I don’t see an issue right away, though I know it has been brought up > before. I hope to resolve it either this week or next - will reply to this > thread with the PR link when ready. > >

Re: [OMPI users] MPI_Comm_accept()

I don’t see an issue right away, though I know it has been brought up before. I hope to resolve it either this week or next - will reply to this thread with the PR link when ready. > On Mar 13, 2017, at 6:16 PM, Adam Sylvester wrote: > > Bummer - thanks for the update. I will revert back to

Re: [OMPI users] MPI_Comm_accept()

Bummer - thanks for the update. I will revert back to 1.10.x for now then. Should I file a bug report for this on GitHub or elsewhere? Or if there's an issue for this already open, can you point me to it so I can keep track of when it's fixed? Any best guess calendar-wise as to when you expect

Re: [OMPI users] MPI_Comm_accept()

You should consider it a bug for now - it won’t work in the 2.0 series, and I don’t think it will work in the upcoming 2.1.0 release. Probably will be fixed after that. > On Mar 13, 2017, at 5:17 AM, Adam Sylvester wrote: > > As a follow-up, I tried this with Open MPI 1.10.4 and this worked a

Re: [OMPI users] MPI_Comm_accept()

As a follow-up, I tried this with Open MPI 1.10.4 and this worked as expected (the port formatting looks really different): $ mpirun -np 1 ./server Port name is 1286733824.0;tcp://10.102.16.135:43074 +1286733825.0;tcp://10.102.16.135::300 Accepted! $ mpirun -np 1 ./client "1286733824.0;tcp://10.1

Re: [OMPI users] MPI_Comm_accept() / MPI_Comm_connect() fail between two different machines

__ > From: users [users-boun...@open-mpi.org] On Behalf Of Ralph Castain > [r...@open-mpi.org] > Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2015 11:10 AM > To: Open MPI Users > Subject: Re: [OMPI users] MPI_Comm_accept() / MPI_Comm_connect() fail > between two different machines &g

Re: [OMPI users] MPI_Comm_accept() / MPI_Comm_connect() fail between two different machines

rom: users [users-boun...@open-mpi.org] On Behalf Of Ralph Castain [r...@open-mpi.org] Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2015 11:10 AM To: Open MPI Users Subject: Re: [OMPI users] MPI_Comm_accept() / MPI_Comm_connect() fail between two different machines This seems to fix the problem when using yo

Re: [OMPI users] MPI_Comm_accept() / MPI_Comm_connect() fail between two different machines

> > Thanks, > > Martin > > -Original Message- > From: users [mailto:users-boun...@open-mpi.org] On Behalf Of Ralph Castain > Sent: July 13, 2015 22:55 > To: Open MPI Users > Subject: Re: [OMPI users] MPI_Comm_accept() / MPI_Comm_connect() fail between >

Re: [OMPI users] MPI_Comm_accept() / MPI_Comm_connect() fail between two different machines

I will happily test any patch you send me to fix this problem. Thanks, Martin -Original Message- From: users [mailto:users-boun...@open-mpi.org] On Behalf Of Ralph Castain Sent: July 13, 2015 22:55 To: Open MPI Users Subject: Re: [OMPI users] MPI_Comm_accept() / MPI_Comm_connect() fail

Re: [OMPI users] MPI_Comm_accept() / MPI_Comm_connect() fail between two different machines

+227265.0;tcp://172.17.15.20:34776:300' > 2>&1 | tee client_out.txt > > Martin > > From: users [users-boun...@open-mpi.org] On Behalf Of Ralph Castain > [r...@open-mpi.org] > Sent: Monday, July 13, 2015 5:29 PM > To:

Re: [OMPI users] MPI_Comm_accept() / MPI_Comm_connect() fail between two different machines

July 13, 2015 5:29 PM To: Open MPI Users Subject: Re: [OMPI users] MPI_Comm_accept() / MPI_Comm_connect() fail between two different machines Try running it with “—mca oob_base_verbose 100” on both client and server - it will tell us why the connection was refused. > On Jul 13, 2015, at 2:14

Re: [OMPI users] MPI_Comm_accept() / MPI_Comm_connect() fail between two different machines

Try running it with “—mca oob_base_verbose 100” on both client and server - it will tell us why the connection was refused. > On Jul 13, 2015, at 2:14 PM, Audet, Martin > wrote: > > Hi OMPI_Developers, > > It seems that I am unable to establish an MPI communication between two > independent

Re: [OMPI users] MPI_Comm_accept randomly gives errors

Thanks for the information. As there is also a problem with intercommunicator after spawn in 1.6.x I'll turn to another solution. Valentin Clément On Oct 15, 2012, at 10:41 PM, Ralph Castain wrote: > Yeah, we don't support multi-threaded operations very well at this time. I > think you'd h

Re: [OMPI users] MPI_Comm_accept randomly gives errors

Yeah, we don't support multi-threaded operations very well at this time. I think you'd have better success with the 1.7 series as it is released, but very much doubt the 1.6 series could do this as you describe. One way to solve the immediate problem would be to funnel all MPI operations into a

Re: [OMPI users] MPI_Comm_accept - Busy wait

Thank you for the explanation! I use "-mca mpi_yield_when_idle 1" already! Thank you again! --- Thatyene Ramos On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 3:43 PM, Ralph Castain wrote: > Sorry - been occupied. This is normal behavior. As has been discussed on > this list before, OMPI made a design decision to mini

Re: [OMPI users] MPI_Comm_accept - Busy wait

Sorry - been occupied. This is normal behavior. As has been discussed on this list before, OMPI made a design decision to minimize latency. This means we aggressively poll for connections. Only thing you can do is tell it to yield the processor when idle so, if something else is trying to run, w

Re: [OMPI users] MPI_Comm_accept - Busy wait

Does anyone have any idea? --- Thatyene Ramos On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 12:01 PM, Thatyene Louise Alves de Souza Ramos < thaty...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi there! > > In my code I use MPI_Comm_accept in a server-client communication. I > noticed that the server remains on busy wait whereas waiting for

Re: [OMPI users] MPI_Comm_accept and MPI_Comm_connect both use 100% one cpu core. Is it a bug?

It's not a bug - that is normal behavior. The processes are polling hard to establish the connections as quickly as possible. On Sep 1, 2010, at 7:24 PM, lyb wrote: > Hi, All, > > I tested two sample applications on Windows 2003 Server, one use > MPI_Comm_accept and other use MPI_Comm_connect

Re: [OMPI users] MPI_Comm_accept() busy waiting?

On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 05:43:02PM +0100, Ramon wrote: > Am I the only one experiencing such problem? Is there any solution? No, you are not the only one. Several others have mentioned the "busy wait" problem. The response on the OpenMPI developers, as I understand it, is that the MPI job shoul

Re: [OMPI users] MPI_Comm_accept() busy waiting?

Am I the only one experiencing such problem? Is there any solution? Or shall I downgrade to LAM/MPI? Regards Ramon. Ramon wrote: Hi, I've recently been trying to develop a client-server distributed file system (for my thesis) using the MPI. The communication between the machines is wor

Re: [OMPI users] MPI_Comm_accept()/connect() errors

set in the .profile file on the hpcc00 node. Would there be a change anywhere else? From: Ralph Castain [mailto:rhc.open...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Ralph Castain Sent: 07 October 2009 13:32 To: Blesson Varghese Subject: Re: [OMPI users] MPI_Comm_accept()/connect() errors Yes, it does. But

Re: [OMPI users] MPI_Comm_accept()/connect() errors

On Oct 1, 2009, at 7:00 AM, Blesson Varghese wrote: The following is the information regarding the error. I am running Open MPI 1.2.5 on Ubuntu 4.2.4, kernel version 2.6.24 Is there any chance that you can upgrade to the Open MPI v1.3 series? -- Jeff Squyres jsquy...@cisco.com

Re: [OMPI users] MPI_Comm_accept()/connect() errors

overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 RX bytes:1794266658 (1.6 GB) TX bytes:1794266658 (1.6 GB) Regards, Blesson. From: users-boun...@open-mpi.org [mailto:users-boun...@open-mpi.org] On Behalf Of Ralph Castain Sent: 29 September 2009 23:59 To: Open MPI Users Subject:

Re: [OMPI users] MPI_Comm_accept()/connect() errors

:2000 Regards, Blesson. From: users-boun...@open-mpi.org [mailto:users-boun...@open-mpi.org] On Behalf Of Ralph Castain Sent: 29 September 2009 23:59 To: Open MPI Users Subject: Re: [OMPI users] MPI_Comm_accept()/connect() errors I will ask the obvious - what version of Open MPI are you

Re: [OMPI users] MPI_Comm_accept()/connect() errors

I will ask the obvious - what version of Open MPI are you running? In what environment? What was your command line? :-) On Sep 29, 2009, at 3:50 PM, Blesson Varghese wrote: Hi, I have been trying to execute the server.c and client.c program provided in http://www.mpi-forum.org/docs/mpi21-

Re: [OMPI users] MPI_Comm_Accept / MPI::Comm::Accept problem.

For the moment, a possible workaround might be to use plain TCP sockets (i.e., outside of MPI) to make the initial connection. That way, you can just have your server blocking in accept(). After the TCP connection is made, use MPI_COMM_JOIN to create a communicator and then proceed with no

Re: [OMPI users] MPI_Comm_Accept / MPI::Comm::Accept problem.

Hi Jeff, thanks for taking the time to answer this. I actually reached that conclusion after trying a simple MPI::Barrier() with both OpenMPI and Lam-MPI , where both had the same active wait kind of behaviour. What I'm trying to achive is to have some kind of calculation server,

Re: [OMPI users] MPI_Comm_Accept / MPI::Comm::Accept problem.

This is actually expected behavior. We make the assumption that MPI processes are meant to exhibit as low latency as possible, and therefore use active polling for most message passing. Additionally, it may be possible that connections could come across multiple devices, so we need to poll