On Oct 3, 2012, at 8:40 AM, Siegmar Gross
wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> As I said, in the absence of a hostfile, -host assigns ONE slot for
>> each time a host is named. So the equivalent hostfile would have
>> "slots=1" to create the same pattern as your -host cmd line.
>
> That would mean that a hostfi
Hi,
> As I said, in the absence of a hostfile, -host assigns ONE slot for
> each time a host is named. So the equivalent hostfile would have
> "slots=1" to create the same pattern as your -host cmd line.
That would mean that a hostfile has nothing to do with the underlying
hardware and that it wo
As I said, in the absence of a hostfile, -host assigns ONE slot for each time a
host is named. So the equivalent hostfile would have "slots=1" to create the
same pattern as your -host cmd line.
On Oct 3, 2012, at 7:12 AM, Siegmar Gross
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I thought that "slot" is the smallest
Hi,
I thought that "slot" is the smallest manageable entity so that I
must set "slot=4" for a dual-processor dual-core machine with one
hardware-thread per core. Today I learned about the new keyword
"sockets" for a hostfile (I didn't find it in "man orte_hosts").
How would I specify a system with
On Oct 3, 2012, at 6:19 AM, Siegmar Gross
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I recognized another problem with procecss bindings. The command
> works, if I use "-host" and it breaks, if I use "-hostfile" with
> the same machines.
>
> tyr fd1026 178 mpiexec -report-bindings -host sunpc0,sunpc1 -np 4 \
> -cpus
