Scott Atchley wrote:
Terry,
Are you testing on Linux? If so, which kernel?
No, I am running into issues on Solaris but Ollie's run of the test code
on Linux seems to work fine.
--td
See the patch to iperf to handle kernel 2.6.21 and the issue that
they had with usleep(0):
http://das
Terry,
Are you testing on Linux? If so, which kernel?
See the patch to iperf to handle kernel 2.6.21 and the issue that
they had with usleep(0):
http://dast.nlanr.net/Projects/Iperf2.0/patch-iperf-linux-2.6.21.txt
Scott
On Aug 31, 2007, at 1:36 PM, Terry D. Dontje wrote:
Ok, I have an up
Ok, I have an update to this issue. I believe there is an
implementation difference of sched_yield between Linux and Solaris. If
I change the sched_yield in opal_progress to be a usleep(500) then my
program completes quite quickly. I have sent a few questions to a
Solaris engineer and hopefu
On Thu, 2007-08-30 at 12:45 -0400, terry.don...@sun.com wrote:
> Li-Ta Lo wrote:
>
> >On Thu, 2007-08-30 at 12:25 -0400, terry.don...@sun.com wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Li-Ta Lo wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>On Wed, 2007-08-29 at 14:06 -0400, Terry D. Dontje wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
>
Li-Ta Lo wrote:
On Thu, 2007-08-30 at 12:25 -0400, terry.don...@sun.com wrote:
Li-Ta Lo wrote:
On Wed, 2007-08-29 at 14:06 -0400, Terry D. Dontje wrote:
hmmm, interesting since my version doesn't abort at all.
Some problem with fortran compiler/language binding
On Thu, 2007-08-30 at 12:25 -0400, terry.don...@sun.com wrote:
> Li-Ta Lo wrote:
>
> >On Wed, 2007-08-29 at 14:06 -0400, Terry D. Dontje wrote:
> >
> >
> >>hmmm, interesting since my version doesn't abort at all.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >Some problem with fortran compiler/language binding?
Li-Ta Lo wrote:
On Wed, 2007-08-29 at 14:06 -0400, Terry D. Dontje wrote:
hmmm, interesting since my version doesn't abort at all.
Some problem with fortran compiler/language binding? My C translation
doesn't have any problem.
[ollie@exponential ~]$ mpirun -np 4 a.out 10
Target d
On Wed, 2007-08-29 at 14:06 -0400, Terry D. Dontje wrote:
> hmmm, interesting since my version doesn't abort at all.
>
Some problem with fortran compiler/language binding? My C translation
doesn't have any problem.
[ollie@exponential ~]$ mpirun -np 4 a.out 10
Target duration (seconds): 10.
hmmm, interesting since my version doesn't abort at all.
--td
Li-Ta Lo wrote:
On Wed, 2007-08-29 at 11:36 -0400, Terry D. Dontje wrote:
To run the code I usually do "mpirun -np 6 a.out 10" on a 2 core
system. It'll print out the following and then hang:
Target duration (seconds):
On Wed, 2007-08-29 at 11:36 -0400, Terry D. Dontje wrote:
> To run the code I usually do "mpirun -np 6 a.out 10" on a 2 core
> system. It'll print out the following and then hang:
> Target duration (seconds): 10.00
> # of messages sent in that time: 589207
> Microseconds per mess
To run the code I usually do "mpirun -np 6 a.out 10" on a 2 core
system. It'll print out the following and then hang:
Target duration (seconds): 10.00
# of messages sent in that time: 589207
Microseconds per message: 16.972
--td
Terry D. Dontje wrote:
Heard you th
Heard you the first time Gleb, just been backed up with other stuff.
Following is the code:
include "mpif.h"
character(20) cmd_line_arg ! We'll use the first command-line argument
! to set the duration of the test.
real(8) :: duration = 10 ! The de
On Wed, Aug 29, 2007 at 11:01:14AM -0400, Richard Graham wrote:
> If you are going to look at it, I will not bother with this.
I need the code to reproduce the problem. Otherwise I have nothing to
look at.
>
> Rich
>
>
> On 8/29/07 10:47 AM, "Gleb Natapov" wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Aug 29, 2007 a
If you are going to look at it, I will not bother with this.
Rich
On 8/29/07 10:47 AM, "Gleb Natapov" wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 29, 2007 at 10:46:06AM -0400, Richard Graham wrote:
>> Gleb,
>> Are you looking at this ?
> Not today. And I need the code to reproduce the bug. Is this possible?
>
>>
On Wed, Aug 29, 2007 at 10:46:06AM -0400, Richard Graham wrote:
> Gleb,
> Are you looking at this ?
Not today. And I need the code to reproduce the bug. Is this possible?
>
> Rich
>
>
> On 8/29/07 9:56 AM, "Gleb Natapov" wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Aug 29, 2007 at 04:48:07PM +0300, Gleb Natapov wr
Gleb,
Are you looking at this ?
Rich
On 8/29/07 9:56 AM, "Gleb Natapov" wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 29, 2007 at 04:48:07PM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote:
>> Is this trunk or 1.2?
> Oops. I should read more carefully :) This is trunk.
>
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 29, 2007 at 09:40:30AM -0400, Terry D. Dontje w
On Wed, Aug 29, 2007 at 04:48:07PM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> Is this trunk or 1.2?
Oops. I should read more carefully :) This is trunk.
>
> On Wed, Aug 29, 2007 at 09:40:30AM -0400, Terry D. Dontje wrote:
> > I have a program that does a simple bucket brigade of sends and receives
> > where r
Trunk.
--td
Gleb Natapov wrote:
Is this trunk or 1.2?
On Wed, Aug 29, 2007 at 09:40:30AM -0400, Terry D. Dontje wrote:
I have a program that does a simple bucket brigade of sends and receives
where rank 0 is the start and repeatedly sends to rank 1 until a certain
amount of time has passe
Is this trunk or 1.2?
On Wed, Aug 29, 2007 at 09:40:30AM -0400, Terry D. Dontje wrote:
> I have a program that does a simple bucket brigade of sends and receives
> where rank 0 is the start and repeatedly sends to rank 1 until a certain
> amount of time has passed and then it sends and all done
19 matches
Mail list logo
