Hi all There was very little response to these notes, so I'm moving forward as per the initial mailings. Here is what was concluded - holler if you have a comment.
Ralph On 12/4/07 8:09 AM, "Ralph H Castain" <r...@lanl.gov> wrote: > Yo all > > As (I hope) many of you know, we are in a final phase of revamping ORTE to > simplify the code, enhance scalability, and improve reliability. In working > on this effort, we recently uncovered four issues that merit broader > discussion (apologies in advance for verbosity). Although these somewhat > relate, I realize that people may care about some and not others. Hence, to > provide the chance to only comment on those you -do- care about, and to at > least somewhat constrain the length of the emails, I will be sending out a > series of four emails in this area. > > The issues will include: > > I. Support for non-MPI jobs We will maintain the support to launch (both at mpirun time and dynamically) non-MPI jobs. We will not require a command-line switch warning us that "this is not an MPI job" - this maintains the existing capability. We will add an MPI_Info key to indicate that the comm_spawned job will not be calling MPI_Init so we don't attempt to modex with it. > > II. Interaction between the ROUTED and GRPCOMM frameworks We will leave this "as-is" - so if you select a pairing that clashes (e.g., the default grpcomm and a ring routing algo), your startup (including OpenIB wireup) performance will stink. User beware. > > III. Collective communications across daemons Nobody has time to work on this one. I will insert hooks where these collectives can go, and may play with at least one implementation. > > IV. RTE/MPI relative modex responsibilities We are still wrestling with this one - hope to resolve it sometime soon. > > > Please feel free to contact me and/or comment on any of these issues. As a > reminder, if you do comment back to the Devel mailing list, please use > "reply all" so I will also receive a copy of the message. > > Thanks > Ralph > >
