Ralph, Thank you so much!!
I'll give it a try and let you know. I know it's a tough question, but how stable is the dev trunk? Can I just grab the latest and run, or am I better off taking your changes and copy them back in a stable release? (if so, which one? 1.4? 1.5?) p. On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 3:50 PM, Ralph Castain <r...@open-mpi.org> wrote: > It was easier for me to just construct this module than to explain how to do > so :-) > > I will commit it this evening (couple of hours from now) as that is our > standard practice. You'll need to use the developer's trunk, though, to use > it. > > Here are the envars you'll need to provide: > > Each process needs to get the same following values: > > * OMPI_MCA_ess=generic > * OMPI_MCA_orte_num_procs=<number of MPI procs> > * OMPI_MCA_orte_nodes=<a comma-separated list of nodenames where MPI procs > reside> > * OMPI_MCA_orte_ppn=<number of procs/node> > > Note that I have assumed this last value is a constant for simplicity. If > that isn't the case, let me know - you could instead provide it as a > comma-separated list of values with an entry for each node. > > In addition, you need to provide the following value that will be unique to > each process: > > * OMPI_MCA_orte_rank=<MPI rank> > > Finally, you have to provide a range of static TCP ports for use by the > processes. Pick any range that you know will be available across all the > nodes. You then need to ensure that each process sees the following envar: > > * OMPI_MCA_oob_tcp_static_ports=6000-6010 <== obviously, replace this with > your range > > You will need a port range that is at least equal to the ppn for the job > (each proc on a node will take one of the provided ports). > > That should do it. I compute everything else I need from those values. > > Does that work for you? > Ralph > > > On Jul 22, 2010, at 6:48 AM, Philippe wrote: > >> On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 10:44 AM, Ralph Castain <r...@open-mpi.org> wrote: >>> >>> On Jul 21, 2010, at 7:44 AM, Philippe wrote: >>> >>>> Ralph, >>>> >>>> Sorry for the late reply -- I was away on vacation. >>> >>> no problem at all! >>> >>>> >>>> regarding your earlier question about how many processes where >>>> involved when the memory was entirely allocated, it was only two, a >>>> sender and a receiver. I'm still trying to pinpoint what can be >>>> different between the standalone case and the "integrated" case. I >>>> will try to find out what part of the code is allocating memory in a >>>> loop. >>> >>> hmmm....that sounds like a bug in your program. let me know what you find >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 12:51 AM, Ralph Castain <r...@open-mpi.org> wrote: >>>>> Well, I finally managed to make this work without the required >>>>> ompi-server rendezvous point. The fix is only in the devel trunk right >>>>> now - I'll have to ask the release managers for 1.5 and 1.4 if they want >>>>> it ported to those series. >>>>> >>>> >>>> great -- i'll give it a try >>>> >>>>> On the notion of integrating OMPI to your launch environment: remember >>>>> that we don't necessarily require that you use mpiexec for that purpose. >>>>> If your launch environment provides just a little info in the environment >>>>> of the launched procs, we can usually devise a method that allows the >>>>> procs to perform an MPI_Init as a single job without all this work you >>>>> are doing. >>>>> >>>> >>>> I'm working on creating operators using MPI for the IBM product >>>> "InfoSphere Streams". It has its own launching mechanism to start the >>>> processes. However I can pass some information to the processes that >>>> belong to the same job (Streams job -- which should neatly map to MPI >>>> job). >>>> >>>>> Only difference is that your procs will all block in MPI_Init until they >>>>> -all- have executed that function. If that isn't a problem, this would be >>>>> a much more scalable and reliable method than doing it thru massive calls >>>>> to MPI_Port_connect. >>>>> >>>> >>>> in the general case, that would be a problem, but for my prototype, >>>> this is acceptable. >>>> >>>> In general, each process is composed of operators, some may be MPI >>>> related and some may not. But in my case, I know ahead of time which >>>> processes will be part of the MPI job, so I can easily deal with the >>>> fact that they would block on MPI_init (actually -- MPI_thread_init >>>> since its using a lot of threads). >>> >>> We have talked in the past about creating a non-blocking MPI_Init as an >>> extension to the standard. It would lock you to Open MPI, though... >>> >>> Regardless, at some point you would have to know how many processes are >>> going to be part of the job so you can know when MPI_Init is complete. I >>> would think you would require that info for the singleton wireup anyway - >>> yes? Otherwise, how would you know when to quit running connect-accept? >>> >> >> the short answer is yes... although, the longer answer is a bit more >> complicated. currently I do know the number of connect I need to do on >> a per-port basis. a job can contains an arbitrary number of MPI >> processes, each opening one or more ports. so i know the count port by >> ports but I dont need to worry about how many MPI processes there is >> globally. to make things a bit more complicated, each MPI operator can >> be "fused" with other operators to make a process. each fused operator >> may or may not require MPI. the bottom line is, to get the total >> number of processes to calculate rank&size, I need to reverse engineer >> the fusing that the compiler may do. >> >> but that's ok, I'm willing to do that for our prototype :-) >> >>>> >>>> Is there a documentation or example I can use to see what information >>>> I can pass to the processes to enable that? Is it just environment >>>> variables? >>> >>> No real documentation - a lack I should probably fill. At the moment, we >>> don't have a "generic" module for standalone launch, but I can create one >>> as it is pretty trivial. I would then need you to pass each process envars >>> telling it the total number of processes in the MPI job, its rank within >>> that job, and a file where some rendezvous process (can be rank=0) has >>> provided that port string. Armed with that info, I can wireup the job. >>> >>> Won't be as scalable as an mpirun-initiated startup, but will be much >>> better than doing it from singletons. >> >> that would be great. I can definitely pass environment variables to >> each process. >> >>> >>> Or if you prefer, we could setup an "infosphere" module that we could >>> customize for this system. Main thing here would be to provide us with some >>> kind of regex (or access to a file containing the info) that describes the >>> map of rank to node so we can construct the wireup communication pattern. >>> >> >> i think for our prototype we are fine with the first method. I'd leave >> the cleaner implementation as a task for the product team ;-) >> >> regarding the "generic" module, is that something you can put together >> quickly? can I help in any way? >> >> Thanks! >> p >> >>> Either way would work. The second is more scalable, but I don't know if you >>> have (or can construct) the map info. >>> >>>> >>>> Many thanks! >>>> p. >>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Jul 18, 2010, at 4:09 PM, Philippe wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Ralph, >>>>>> >>>>>> thanks for investigating. >>>>>> >>>>>> I've applied the two patches you mentioned earlier and ran with the >>>>>> ompi server. Although i was able to runn our standalone test, when I >>>>>> integrated the changes to our code, the processes entered a crazy loop >>>>>> and allocated all the memory available when calling MPI_Port_Connect. >>>>>> I was not able to identify why it works standalone but not integrated >>>>>> with our code. If I found why, I'll let your know. >>>>>> >>>>>> looking forward to your findings. We'll be happy to test any patches >>>>>> if you have some! >>>>>> >>>>>> p. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 9:47 PM, Ralph Castain <r...@open-mpi.org> wrote: >>>>>>> Okay, I can reproduce this problem. Frankly, I don't think this ever >>>>>>> worked with OMPI, and I'm not sure how the choice of BTL makes a >>>>>>> difference. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The program is crashing in the communicator definition, which involves >>>>>>> a communication over our internal out-of-band messaging system. That >>>>>>> system has zero connection to any BTL, so it should crash either way. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Regardless, I will play with this a little as time allows. Thanks for >>>>>>> the reproducer! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Jun 25, 2010, at 7:23 AM, Philippe wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I'm trying to run a test program which consists of a server creating a >>>>>>>> port using MPI_Open_port and N clients using MPI_Comm_connect to >>>>>>>> connect to the server. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I'm able to do so with 1 server and 2 clients, but with 1 server + 3 >>>>>>>> clients, I get the following error message: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> [node003:32274] [[37084,0],0]:route_callback tried routing message >>>>>>>> from [[37084,1],0] to [[40912,1],0]:102, can't find route >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This is only happening with the openib BTL. With tcp BTL it works >>>>>>>> perfectly fine (ofud also works as a matter of fact...). This has been >>>>>>>> tested on two completely different clusters, with identical results. >>>>>>>> In either cases, the IB frabic works normally. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Any help would be greatly appreciated! Several people in my team >>>>>>>> looked at the problem. Google and the mailing list archive did not >>>>>>>> provide any clue. I believe that from an MPI standpoint, my test >>>>>>>> program is valid (and it works with TCP, which make me feel better >>>>>>>> about the sequence of MPI calls) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>>> Philippe. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Background: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I intend to use openMPI to transport data inside a much larger >>>>>>>> application. Because of that, I cannot used mpiexec. Each process is >>>>>>>> started by our own "job management" and use a name server to find >>>>>>>> about each others. Once all the clients are connected, I would like >>>>>>>> the server to do MPI_Recv to get the data from all the client. I dont >>>>>>>> care about the order or which client are sending data, as long as I >>>>>>>> can receive it with on call. Do do that, the clients and the server >>>>>>>> are going through a series of Comm_accept/Conn_connect/Intercomm_merge >>>>>>>> so that at the end, all the clients and the server are inside the same >>>>>>>> intracomm. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Steps: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I have a sample program that show the issue. I tried to make it as >>>>>>>> short as possible. It needs to be executed on a shared file system >>>>>>>> like NFS because the server write the port info to a file that the >>>>>>>> client will read. To reproduce the issue, the following steps should >>>>>>>> be performed: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 0. compile the test with "mpicc -o ben12 ben12.c" >>>>>>>> 1. ssh to the machine that will be the server >>>>>>>> 2. run ./ben12 3 1 >>>>>>>> 3. ssh to the machine that will be the client #1 >>>>>>>> 4. run ./ben12 3 0 >>>>>>>> 5. repeat step 3-4 for client #2 and #3 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> the server accept the connection from client #1 and merge it in a new >>>>>>>> intracomm. It then accept connection from client #2 and merge it. when >>>>>>>> the client #3 arrives, the server accept the connection, but that >>>>>>>> cause client #1 and #2 to die with the error above (see the complete >>>>>>>> trace in the tarball). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The exact steps are: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> - server open port >>>>>>>> - server does accept >>>>>>>> - client #1 does connect >>>>>>>> - server and client #1 do merge >>>>>>>> - server does accept >>>>>>>> - client #2 does connect >>>>>>>> - server, client #1 and client #2 do merge >>>>>>>> - server does accept >>>>>>>> - client #3 does connect >>>>>>>> - server, client #1, client #2 and client #3 do merge >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> My infiniband network works normally with other test programs or >>>>>>>> applications (MPI or others like Verbs). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Info about my setup: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> openMPI version = 1.4.1 (I also tried 1.4.2, nightly snapshot of >>>>>>>> 1.4.3, nightly snapshot of 1.5 --- all show the same error) >>>>>>>> config.log in the tarball >>>>>>>> "ompi_info --all" in the tarball >>>>>>>> OFED version = 1.3 installed from RHEL 5.3 >>>>>>>> Distro = RedHat Entreprise Linux 5.3 >>>>>>>> Kernel = 2.6.18-128.4.1.el5 x86_64 >>>>>>>> subnet manager = built-in SM from the cisco/topspin switch >>>>>>>> output of ibv_devinfo included in the tarball (there are no "bad" >>>>>>>> nodes) >>>>>>>> "ulimit -l" says "unlimited" >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The tarball contains: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> - ben12.c: my test program showing the behavior >>>>>>>> - config.log / config.out / make.out / make-install.out / >>>>>>>> ifconfig.txt / ibv-devinfo.txt / ompi_info.txt >>>>>>>> - trace-tcp.txt: output of the server and each client when it works >>>>>>>> with TCP (I added "btl = tcp,self" in ~/.openmpi/mca-params.conf) >>>>>>>> - trace-ib.txt: output of the server and each client when it fails >>>>>>>> with IB (I added "btl = openib,self" in ~/.openmpi/mca-params.conf) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I hope I provided enough info for somebody to reproduce the problem... >>>>>>>> <ompi-output.tar.bz2>_______________________________________________ >>>>>>>> users mailing list >>>>>>>> us...@open-mpi.org >>>>>>>> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/users >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> users mailing list >>>>>>> us...@open-mpi.org >>>>>>> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/users >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> users mailing list >>>>>> us...@open-mpi.org >>>>>> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/users >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> users mailing list >>>>> us...@open-mpi.org >>>>> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/users >>>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> users mailing list >>>> us...@open-mpi.org >>>> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/users >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> users mailing list >>> us...@open-mpi.org >>> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/users >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> users mailing list >> us...@open-mpi.org >> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/users > > > _______________________________________________ > users mailing list > us...@open-mpi.org > http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/users >
