Thank you, Gilles for the pointer. I see what operations supported in SM now.
On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 8:05 PM, Gilles Gouaillardet <gil...@rist.or.jp> wrote: > Saliya, > > from ompi/mca/coll/sm/coll_sm_module.c in mca_coll_sm_comm_query() > sm_module->super.coll_allgatherv = NULL; > > that means the coll sm module does *not* implement allgatherv, so openmpi > will use the next module > (which is very likely the default module, that is why there is no > performance improvement in your specific benchmark) > > Cheers, > > Gilles > > > > On 12/10/2015 2:53 AM, Saliya Ekanayake wrote: > > Hi, > > In a previous email, I wanted to know how to enable shared memory > collectives and I was told setting the coll_sm_priority to anything over 30 > should do it. > > I tested this for a microbenchmark on allgatherv, but it didn't improve > performance over the default setting. See below, where I tested for > different number of processes per node on 48 nodes. The total message size > is kept constant at 2400000 bytes (or 2.28MB). > > Am I doing something wrong here? > > Thank you, > saliya > > [image: Inline image 1] > > -- > Saliya Ekanayake > Ph.D. Candidate | Research Assistant > School of Informatics and Computing | Digital Science Center > Indiana University, Bloomington > Cell 812-391-4914 > http://saliya.org > > > _______________________________________________ > users mailing listus...@open-mpi.org > Subscription: http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/users > Link to this post: > http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/users/2015/12/28153.php > > > > _______________________________________________ > users mailing list > us...@open-mpi.org > Subscription: http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/users > Link to this post: > http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/users/2015/12/28156.php > -- Saliya Ekanayake Ph.D. Candidate | Research Assistant School of Informatics and Computing | Digital Science Center Indiana University, Bloomington Cell 812-391-4914 http://saliya.org
