Hi Ralph,Jeff and all
It is a good news that I can almost run the openmpi on the vxworks
,but there are also still some bugs.The final test which has passed is:
Rank 0 process calls mpi_send running on the host 0,rank 1 process
calls mpi_recv running on the host 1. It works well .For
Sorry, I should have included the link containing the discussion of
the plot.
http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/devel/2010/06/8078.php
--
Samuel K. Gutierrez
Los Alamos National Laboratory
On Aug 12, 2010, at 11:20 AM, Terry Dontje wrote:
Sorry Rich, I didn't realize there was a graph
Sorry Rich, I didn't realize there was a graph attached at the end of
message. In other words my comments are not applicable because I really
didn't know you were asking about the graph. I agree it would be nice
to know what the graph was plotting.
--td
Terry Dontje wrote:
Graham, Richard L
On Aug 12, 2010, at 7:21 AM, Terry Dontje wrote:
> Is there not a way to determine whether the fs is tmpfs or not?
I don't know -- Rainer?
> It seems fixing that is a lot less changes then adapting to Posix shared
> memory.
Keep in mind that the sm BTL itself did not change.
The parts th
Graham, Richard L. wrote:
Stupid question:
What is being plotted, and what are the units ?
Rich
MB of Resident and Shared memory as gotten from top (on linux). The
values for each of the processes run cases seem to be the same between
posix, mmap and sysv.
--td
On 8/11/10 3:15 PM, "
Stupid question:
What is being plotted, and what are the units ?
Rich
On 8/11/10 3:15 PM, "Samuel K. Gutierrez" wrote:
Hi Terry,
On Aug 11, 2010, at 12:34 PM, Terry Dontje wrote:
I've done some minor testing on Linux looking at resident and shared memory
sizes for np=4, 8 and
Will do.
--td
Samuel K. Gutierrez wrote:
Hi Terry,
One more thing... Before testing on Solaris 10, could you please
update (I just committed a Solaris 10 fix).
Thanks,
--
Samuel K. Gutierrez
Los Alamos National Laboratory
On Aug 11, 2010, at 1:15 PM, Samuel K. Gutierrez wrote:
Hi Terr
Samuel K. Gutierrez wrote:
If I'm not mistaken, the warning is only issued if the backing files
is stored on the following file systems: Lustre, NFS, Panasas, and
GPFS (see: opal_path_nfs in opal/util/path.c). Based on the
performance numbers that Sylvain provided on June 9th of this year
