FWIW -- we talked about this a bunch in the Louisville and have some
ideas. More details coming in meeting wrapup notes...
On Jul 11, 2008, at 11:14 AM, Ralph H Castain wrote:
Ummm...I actually was talking about the "PLM", not the "PML".
But I believe what you suggest concurs with what I said. In the PLM,
you
could still provide multiple components you want considered, though
it has
less meaning there. My suggestion really is only that we eliminate the
params to adjust relative priority as they are just confusing the
user and
potentially misleading them as to what is going to happen.
Ralph
On 7/11/08 9:07 AM, "Aurélien Bouteiller" <boute...@eecs.utk.edu>
wrote:
We don't want the user to have to select by hand the best PML. The
logic inside the current selection process selects the best pml for
the underlying network. However changing the priority is pretty
meaningless from the user's point of view. So while retaining the
selection process including priorities, we might want to remove the
priority parameter, and use only the pml=ob1,cm syntax from the
user's
point of view.
Aurelien
Le 11 juil. 08 à 10:56, Ralph H Castain a écrit :
Okay, another fun one. Some of the PLM modules use MCA params to
adjust
their relative selection priority. This can lead to very unexpected
behavior
as which module gets selected will depend on the priorities of the
other
selectable modules - which changes from release to release as people
independently make adjustments and/or new modules are added.
Fortunately, this doesn't bite us too often since many environments
only
support one module, and since there is nothing to tell the user that
the plm
module whose priority they raised actually -didn't- get used!
However, in the interest of "least astonishment", some of us working
on the
RTE had changed our coding approach to avoid this confusion. Given
that we
have this nice mca component select logic that takes the specified
module -
i.e., "-mca plm foo" always yields foo if it can run, or errors out
if it
can't - then the safest course is to remove MCA params that adjust
module
priorities and have the user simply tell us which module they want
us to
use.
Do we want to make this consistent, at least in the PLM? Or do you
want to
leave the user guessing? :-)
Ralph
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
de...@open-mpi.org
http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
de...@open-mpi.org
http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
de...@open-mpi.org
http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
--
Jeff Squyres
Cisco Systems
