On Nov 20, 2010, at 12:08 , Sébastien Boisvert wrote:
> Sounds interesting !
>
> Regarding my bug report, I don't think it is very important.
>
> Here's why:
>
> According to the standard MPI 2.2, Open-MPI is correct when blocking on
> any MPI_Send. So, even if Open-MPI __should__ (according t
On 11/23/2010 06:47 AM, Barrett, Brian W wrote:
Short answer: we need the "extra" decrement at the end of MPI init.
Long answer: Ok, so I was somewhat wrong :).
(surprised this didn't show up in testing).
Confirmed with our basic pingpong test:
vayu2:~/MPI > mpirun -n 2 ./pp142 | head -
Short answer: we need the "extra" decrement at the end of MPI init.
Long answer: Ok, so I was somewhat wrong :).
The count of users is initialized to 0. If it's greater than zero, the event
library is polled every time opal_progress() is called, which kills latency
(surprised this didn't show
On Nov 22, 2010, at 11:35 AM, Barrett, Brian W wrote:
> Um, the counter starts initialized at one.
Does that mean that we should or should not leave that extra _decrement() in
there?
> Brian
>
> On Nov 22, 2010, at 9:32 AM, Jeff Squyres wrote:
>
>> A user noticed a specific change that we mad
Um, the counter starts initialized at one.
Brian
On Nov 22, 2010, at 9:32 AM, Jeff Squyres wrote:
> A user noticed a specific change that we made between 1.4.2 and 1.4.3:
>
>https://svn.open-mpi.org/trac/ompi/changeset/23448
>
> which is from CMR https://svn.open-mpi.org/trac/ompi/ticket/2
A user noticed a specific change that we made between 1.4.2 and 1.4.3:
https://svn.open-mpi.org/trac/ompi/changeset/23448
which is from CMR https://svn.open-mpi.org/trac/ompi/ticket/2489, and
originally from trunk https://svn.open-mpi.org/trac/ompi/changeset/23434. I
removed the opal_progr
FYI.
Begin forwarded message:
> From: DongInn Kim
> Date: November 21, 2010 10:46:23 PM CST
> To: "all-osl-us...@osl.iu.edu"
> Subject: [all-osl-users] Fwd: Servers reboot on Wednesday (11/24) morning
> starting at 8:00
>
> Hi,
>
> The OSL NFS server(deep-thought) would restart at 8:00 AM (E
