Am 10.04.2012 um 16:55 schrieb Eloi Gaudry: > Hi Ralf, > > I haven't tried any of the 1.5 series yet (we have chosen not to use the > features releases) but if this is mandatory for you to work on this topic, I > will. > > This might be of interest to Reuti and you : it seems that we cannot > reproduce the problem anymore if we don't provide the "-np N" option on the > orterun command line. Of course, we need to launch a few other runs to be > really sure because the allocation error was not always observable. Actually, > I recently understood (from Reuti) that the tight integration mode would > supply every necessary bits to the launcher and thus I removed the '-np N' > that was around... Could it be that using the '-np N' while using the sge > tight integration mode is pathologic ?
Yes, it should work without problem to specify -np. As it didn't hit me in my tests (normally I don't specify -np), I would really be interested in the underlying cause. Especially as the example in Open MPI's FAQ lists -np to start with GirdEngine integration, it should have hit other users too. -- Reuti > Regards, > Eloi > > > -----Original Message----- > From: users-boun...@open-mpi.org [mailto:users-boun...@open-mpi.org] On > Behalf Of Ralph Castain > Sent: mardi 10 avril 2012 16:43 > To: Open MPI Users > Subject: Re: [OMPI users] sge tight intregration leads to bad allocation > > Could well be a bug in OMPI - I can take a look, though it may be awhile > before I get to it. Have you tried one of the 1.5 series releases? > > On Apr 10, 2012, at 3:42 AM, Eloi Gaudry wrote: > >> Thx. This is the allocation which is also confirmed by the Open MPI output. >> [eg: ] exactly, but not the one used afterwards by openmpi >> >> - The application was compiled with the same version of Open MPI? >> [eg: ] yes, version 1.4.4 for all >> >> - Does the application start something on its own besides the tasks granted >> by mpiexec/orterun? >> [eg: ] no >> >> You want 12 ranks in total, and to barney.fft and carl.fft there are also >> "-mca orte_ess_num_procs 3 " given in to the qrsh_starter. In total I count >> only 10 ranks in this example given - 4+4+2 - do you observe the same? >> [eg: ] i don't know why the -mca orte_ess_num_procs 3 is added here... >> In the "Map generated by mapping policy" output in my last email, I see that >> 4 processes were started on each node (barney, carl and charlie), but yes, >> in the ps -elf output, two of them are missing for one node (barney)... >> sorry about that, a bad copy/paste. Here is the actual output for this node: >> 2048 ? Sl 3:33 /opt/sge/bin/lx-amd64/sge_execd >> 27502 ? Sl 0:00 \_ sge_shepherd-1416 -bg >> 27503 ? Ss 0:00 \_ /opt/sge/utilbin/lx-amd64/qrsh_starter >> /opt/sge/default/spool/barney/active_jobs/1416.1/1.barney >> 27510 ? S 0:00 \_ bash -c >> PATH=/opt/openmpi-1.4.4/bin:$PATH ; export PATH ; >> LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/opt/openmpi-1.4.4/lib:$LD_LIBRARY_PATH ; export >> LD_LIBRARY_PATH ; /opt/openmpi-1.4.4/bin/orted -mca ess env -mca >> orte_ess_jobid 3800367104 -mca orte_ess_vpid 1 -mca orte_ess_num_procs 3 >> --hnp-uri "3800367104.0;tcp://192.168.0.20:57233" --mca >> pls_gridengine_verbose 1 --mca ras_gridengine_show_jobid 1 --mca >> ras_gridengine_verbose 1 >> 27511 ? S 0:00 \_ /opt/openmpi-1.4.4/bin/orted -mca >> ess env -mca orte_ess_jobid 3800367104 -mca orte_ess_vpid 1 -mca >> orte_ess_num_procs 3 --hnp-uri 3800367104.0;tcp://192.168.0.20:57233 --mca >> pls_gridengine_verbose 1 --mca ras_gridengine_show_jobid 1 --mca >> ras_gridengine_verbose 1 >> 27512 ? Rl 12:54 \_ >> /opt/fft/actran_product/Actran_13.0.b.57333/bin/actranpy_mp >> --apl=/opt/fft/actran_product/Actran_13.0.b.57333 -e radiation -m 10000 >> --parallel=frequency --scratch=/scratch/cluster/1416 >> --inputfile=/home/jj/Projects/Toyota/REFERENCE_JPC/semi_green_PML_06/semi_green_coarse.edat >> 27513 ? Rl 12:54 \_ >> /opt/fft/actran_product/Actran_13.0.b.57333/bin/actranpy_mp >> --apl=/opt/fft/actran_product/Actran_13.0.b.57333 -e radiation -m 10000 >> --parallel=frequency --scratch=/scratch/cluster/1416 >> --inputfile=/home/jj/Projects/Toyota/REFERENCE_JPC/semi_green_PML_06/semi_green_coarse.edat >> 27514 ? Rl 12:54 \_ >> /opt/fft/actran_product/Actran_13.0.b.57333/bin/actranpy_mp >> --apl=/opt/fft/actran_product/Actran_13.0.b.57333 -e radiation -m 10000 >> --parallel=frequency --scratch=/scratch/cluster/1416 >> --inputfile=/home/jj/Projects/Toyota/REFERENCE_JPC/semi_green_PML_06/semi_green_coarse.edat >> 27515 ? Rl 12:53 \_ >> /opt/fft/actran_product/Actran_13.0.b.57333/bin/actranpy_mp >> --apl=/opt/fft/actran_product/Actran_13.0.b.57333 -e radiation -m 10000 >> --parallel=frequency --scratch=/scratch/cluster/1416 >> --inputfile=/home/jj/Projects/Toyota/REFERENCE_JPC/semi_green_PML_06/semi_green_coarse.edat >> >> It looks like Open MPI is doing the right thing, but the applications >> decided to start in a different allocation. >> [eg: ] if the "Map generated by mapping policy" is different than the sge >> allocation, then openmpi is not doing the right thing, don't you think ? >> >> Does the application use OpenMP in addition or other kinds of threads? The >> suffix "_mp" in the name "actranpy_mp" makes me suspicious about it. >> [eg: ] no, the suffix _mp stands for "parallel". >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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
