Hi!
I'm working in a project fucusing on fault tolerance in
Grid systems. We have been using LAM-MPI and BLCR so far,
now I want to evaluate OpenMPI.
I read in the mailing lists that the current stable version
of OpenMPI lacks many features on checkpointing, making it
recommended to use the deve
Hello Joe,
I have no solution, but the same problem, see
http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/users/2008/07/6007.php
There you will find a small program to demonstrate the problem.
I found that the problem does not exists on all hardware, I have the
impression that the problem manifests itse
Hi,
I would be glad to receive some information regarding the environment
variable OMPI_MCA_ns_nds_vpid
1> It's Importance
2> It's Use
Thanks,
Aditya Vasal
This variable is only for internal use and has no applicability to a user.
Basically, it is used by the local daemon to tell an application process its
rank when launched.
Note that it disappears in v1.3...so I wouldn't recommend looking for it. Is
there something you are trying to do with it?
Re
On Fri, 2008-07-11 at 07:20 -0600, Ralph H Castain wrote:
> This variable is only for internal use and has no applicability to a user.
> Basically, it is used by the local daemon to tell an application process its
> rank when launched.
>
> Note that it disappears in v1.3...so I wouldn't recommend
On 7/11/08 7:32 AM, "Ashley Pittman"
wrote:
> On Fri, 2008-07-11 at 07:20 -0600, Ralph H Castain wrote:
>> This variable is only for internal use and has no applicability to a user.
>> Basically, it is used by the local daemon to tell an application process its
>> rank when launched.
>>
>> No
Adding the ability to tag stdout/err with the process rank is fairly simple.
We are going to talk about this next week at a design meeting - we have
several different tagging schemes that people have requested, so we want to
define a way to meet them all that doesn't create too much ugliness in the
On Fri, 2008-07-11 at 07:42 -0600, Ralph H Castain wrote:
>
>
> On 7/11/08 7:32 AM, "Ashley Pittman"
> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 2008-07-11 at 07:20 -0600, Ralph H Castain wrote:
> >> This variable is only for internal use and has no applicability to a user.
> >> Basically, it is used by the local d
That sounds great Ralph! Do you have any more details about how the
process rank would be added?
And thanks for the other suggestions from Ashley and Galen. Both
methods look like they would work great, and are probably a little
nicer than my current setup.
-Mark
On Jul 11, 2008, at 9
Not until next week's meeting, but I would guess we would simply prepend the
rank. The issue will be how often to tag the output since we write it in
fragments to avoid blocking - so do we tag the fragment, look for newlines
and tag each line, etc.
We'll figure something out... ;-)
On 7/11/08 7:
On 7/11/08 7:50 AM, "Ashley Pittman"
wrote:
> On Fri, 2008-07-11 at 07:42 -0600, Ralph H Castain wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 7/11/08 7:32 AM, "Ashley Pittman"
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 2008-07-11 at 07:20 -0600, Ralph H Castain wrote:
This variable is only for internal use and has no applicabil
On Fri, 2008-07-11 at 07:59 -0600, Ralph H Castain wrote:
> Not until next week's meeting, but I would guess we would simply prepend the
> rank. The issue will be how often to tag the output since we write it in
> fragments to avoid blocking - so do we tag the fragment, look for newlines
> and tag
On Fri, 2008-07-11 at 08:01 -0600, Ralph H Castain wrote:
> >> I believe this is partly what motivated the creation of the MPI envars - to
> >> create a vehicle that -would- be guaranteed stable for just these purposes.
> >> The concern was that users were doing things that accessed internal envars
On 7/11/08 8:33 AM, "Ashley Pittman"
wrote:
> On Fri, 2008-07-11 at 08:01 -0600, Ralph H Castain wrote:
I believe this is partly what motivated the creation of the MPI envars - to
create a vehicle that -would- be guaranteed stable for just these purposes.
The concern was that us
On Tue, 2008-07-08 at 18:01 -0700, Tom Riddle wrote:
> Thanks Ashley, after going through your suggestions we tried our test
> with valgrind 3.3.0 and with glibc-devel-2.5-18.el5_1.1, both exhibit
> the same results. A simple non-MPI test prog however returns expected
> responses, so valgrind itsel
15 matches
Mail list logo
