Dave,

gettimeofday() uses (seconds, microseconds) to represent the time, and
hence, the resolution is hardcoded to 1 microsecond
clock_gettine() uses (seconds, nanoseconds) and hence the resolution is
hard coded to 1 nanosecond.
this is the max resolution, and it could be lower than that depending on
what gettimeofday() does under the hood.
/* I remember there was an issue with the first software stack of MPSS, the
Xeon phi o/s, and once in a while, the effective time resolution dropped to
100 Hz, and the MPI application has no way to be made aware of that */

bottom line, in OpenMPI, you should not expect a resolution higher than
MPI_Wtick(),
and yes, it might be (way) worst than that

Cheers,

Gilles

On Friday, April 8, 2016, Dave Love <d.l...@liverpool.ac.uk> wrote:

> George Bosilca <bosi...@icl.utk.edu <javascript:;>> writes:
>
> >> Other implementations of MPI have very accurate counters.
> >>
> >
> > This might be a discutable topic. A quick survey of some of the MPI
> > libraries available on a Linux cluster give the following precision for
> > MPI_Wtime implementation :
> >
> > mpich-3.1.4: wtick = 1.000000e-06
> > Intel(R) MPI Library 5.1.1 for Linux*: wtick = 1.000000e-06
> > ompi-1.10.2: wtick = 1.000000e-06
> > ompi-master: wtick = 1.000000e-09
>
> Can you trust wtick anyhow?  OMPI 1.10 says it's always 10⁻⁶, which
> isn't necessarily realistic even if it uses gettimeofday with a nominal
> 1μs resolution.  At least with some (older?) Linuxes, and possibly other
> kernels, gettimeofday is limited to the kernel tick rate -- a few 100 Hz
> if I recall correctly.  I'd need convincing about 1ns generally for the
> real time clock too.
>
> Anyhow, experimentally, RHEL6-packaged mpich 3.1's wtime calls
> gettimeofday and not clock_gettime; likewise impi 4.1.
>
> Thanks for fixing ompi, by the way.
> _______________________________________________
> users mailing list
> us...@open-mpi.org <javascript:;>
> Subscription: http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/users
> Link to this post:
> http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/users/2016/04/28910.php

Reply via email to