On Apr 6, 2010, at 4:59 PM, David Turner wrote:
> Hi Ralph,
>
>> Are you using a scheduler of some kind? If so, you can add this to your
>> default mca param file:
>
> Yes, we are running torque/moab.
>
>> orte_allocation_required = 1
>> This will prevent anyone running without having an allo
On Apr 6, 2010, at 1:03 PM, Sam Preston wrote:
> I have a problem with the cluster I'm currently using where nodes
> 'hang' silently from time to time during an MPI call. This causes the
> blocked MPI processes to block indefinitely -- the only way to detect
> an error is to notice that no more o
Hi Ralph,
Are you using a scheduler of some kind? If so, you can add this to your default
mca param file:
Yes, we are running torque/moab.
orte_allocation_required = 1
This will prevent anyone running without having an allocation. You can also set
Ah. An "allocation". Not much info on
Hi David
Are you using a scheduler of some kind? If so, you can add this to your default
mca param file:
orte_allocation_required = 1
This will prevent anyone running without having an allocation. You can also set
rmaps_base_no_schedule_local = 1
which tells mpirun not to schedule any MPI pro
On 4/6/2010 2:53 PM, Jeff Squyres wrote:
>
> Try NetPIPE -- it has both MPI communication benchmarking and TCP
> benchmarking. Then you can see if there is a noticable difference between
> TCP and MPI (there shouldn't be). There's also a "memcpy" mode in netpipe,
> but it's not quite the sam
Hi,
Our cluster has a handful of login nodes, and then a bunch of
compute nodes. OpenMPI is installed in a global file system
visible from both sets of nodes. This means users can type
"mpirun" from an interactive prompt, and quickly oversubscribe
the login node.
So, is there a way to explicit
BTW, we diverged quite a bit on this thread -- Yves -- does the functionality
that was fixed by Ralph address your original issue?
On Apr 2, 2010, at 10:21 AM, Ralph Castain wrote:
> Testing found that I had missed a spot here, so we weren't fully suppressing
> messages (including MPI_Abort).
For those wishing to follow the thread Dick started on the MPI forum list:
http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mpi-forum/2010/04/0606.php
On Apr 6, 2010, at 2:31 PM, Richard Treumann wrote:
> The MPI standard says that MPI_Abort makes a "best effort". It also says that
> an MPI implementation is fr
On Apr 1, 2010, at 4:17 PM, Oliver Geisler wrote:
> > However, reading through your initial description on Tuesday, none of these
> > fit: You want to actually measure the kernel time on TCP communication
> > costs.
>
> Since the problem occurs also on node only configuration and mca-option
> bt
If you run your cmd with the hostfile option and add --display-allocation, what
does it say?
On Apr 6, 2010, at 12:18 PM, Serge wrote:
> Hi,
>
> OpenMPI integrates with Sun Grid Engine really well, and one does not need to
> specify any parameters for the mpirun command to launch the processes
The MPI standard says that MPI_Abort makes a "best effort". It also says
that an MPI implementation is free to lose the value passed into MPI_Abort
and deliver some other RC..
The standard does not say that MPI_Abort becomes a valid way to end a
parallel job if it is passed a zero.
To me it see
Hi,
OpenMPI integrates with Sun Grid Engine really well, and one does not
need to specify any parameters for the mpirun command to launch the
processes on the compute nodes, that is having in the submission script
"mpirun ./program" is enough; there is no need for "-np XX" or
"-hostfile file_
On 4/1/2010 12:49 PM, Rainer Keller wrote:
> On Thursday 01 April 2010 12:16:25 pm Oliver Geisler wrote:
>> Does anyone know a benchmark program, I could use for testing?
> There's an abundance of benchmarks (IMB, netpipe, SkaMPI...) and performance
> analysis tools (Scalasca, Vampir, Paraver, Op
> Jeff -
>
> I started a discussion of MPI_Quit on the MPI Forum reflector. I raised
> the question because I do not think using MPI_Abort is appropriate.
>
> The situation is when a single task decides the parallel program has
> arrived at the desired answer and therefore whatever the other task
Since I moved to industry a few years ago (i.e., out of academia), I haven't
kept as close of tabs on research papers as I used to, but I would search for
MPI papers dealing with shared memory optimizations. That would likely be a
good starting point. You also might want to look at some (somew
Hi all,
I am doing a literature survey on MPI optimizations on Multi Cores and was
searching for
some good papers.I have got some papers on MPI Intra Node Data Transfer. Can
anybody please
suggest me how to go about it I mean how can I organize the Survey and also
some good source of
papers on the
Hi all,
I have a problem with the cluster I'm currently using where nodes
'hang' silently from time to time during an MPI call. This causes the
blocked MPI processes to block indefinitely -- the only way to detect
an error is to notice that no more output is being written to the log
files. We're
Open MPI opens random TCP sockets during the startup phase of MPI processes --
mostly from the "orted" helper process that is started on each node (or VM)
back to the initiating mpirun process.
Do you have firewalling or other TCP blocking software running? Or are the
appropriate TCP routes se
Jeff -
I started a discussion of MPI_Quit on the MPI Forum reflector. I raised
the question because I do not think using MPI_Abort is appropriate.
The situation is when a single task decides the parallel program has
arrived at the desired answer and therefore whatever the other tasks are
c
I'm not sure I understand what your MPI_Quit function would do differently than
MPI_Abort and/or MPI_Finalize...?
On Apr 6, 2010, at 3:13 AM, Yves Caniou wrote:
> I really understand the failure idea of the MPI_Abort() function, and it
> clearly appeared in the recent mails.
>
> There is an evi
More specifically, Open MPI still uses a TCP layer for its run-time
setup/teardown. That TCP can be regular ethernet, IPoIB, or any other
emulation layer. Ralph's referring to the oob_tcp_if_in|exclude flags allows
you to specify using your IPoIB devices, pure ethernet devices, etc.
On Apr 5
Additionally, Open MPI v1.2.8 is ancient. Can you upgrade to Open MPI v1.4.1?
On Apr 6, 2010, at 3:05 AM, Dmitry Kuzmin wrote:
> If you have a problem with Intel compiler it would be better to ask at Intel
> Forum: http://software.intel.com/en-us/forums/intel-c-compiler/
> icpc 10.0.023 is qui
@Trent
> the 1024 RSA has already been cracked.
Yeah but unless you've got 3 guys spending 100 hours varying the
voltage of your processors
it is still safe... :)
On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 11:35 AM, Reuti wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Am 06.04.2010 um 09:48 schrieb Terry Frankcombe:
>
>>> 1. Run the following
Hi,
Am 06.04.2010 um 09:48 schrieb Terry Frankcombe:
>> 1. Run the following command on the client
>> * -> ssh-keygen -t dsa
>> 2. File id_dsa and id_dsa.pub will be created inside $HOME/.ssh
>> 3. Copy id_dsa.pub to the server's .ssh directory
>> * -> scp $HOME/.ssh/id_ds
I have and the 1024 RSA has already been cracked.
-Original Message-
From: users-boun...@open-mpi.org [mailto:users-boun...@open-mpi.org] On
Behalf Of Terry Frankcombe
Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 2:44 AM
To: Open MPI Users
Subject: Re: [OMPI users] Help om Openmpi
On Tue, 2010-04-06 a
>1. Run the following command on the client
> * -> ssh-keygen -t dsa
>2. File id_dsa and id_dsa.pub will be created inside $HOME/.ssh
>3. Copy id_dsa.pub to the server's .ssh directory
> * -> scp $HOME/.ssh/id_dsa.pub user@server:/home/user/.ssh
>4. Change to /
On Tue, 2010-04-06 at 02:33 -0500, Trent Creekmore wrote:
> SSH means SECURE Shell. That being said, it would not be very secure
> without a password, now would it?
I think you need to read about public key authentication. It is secure.
SSH means SECURE Shell. That being said, it would not be very secure without
a password, now would it?
Besides it is the user account that requires passwords, not SHH.
From: users-boun...@open-mpi.org [mailto:users-boun...@open-mpi.org] On
Behalf Of Huynh Thuc Cuoc
Sent: Monday, April 05, 2
I really understand the failure idea of the MPI_Abort() function, and it
clearly appeared in the recent mails.
There is an evident advantage for me to have an MPI_Quit() function:
Having such a function would be great in the sens that someone would not have
to code the termination mechanism, who
If you have a problem with Intel compiler it would be better to ask at Intel
Forum: http://software.intel.com/en-us/forums/intel-c-compiler/
icpc 10.0.023 is quite old and probably worth to update it.
Regards!
Dmitry
2010/4/6 Peter Kjellstrom
> On Monday 05 April 2010, Steve Swanekamp (L3-Ti
On Monday 05 April 2010, Steve Swanekamp (L3-Titan Contractor) wrote:
> When I try to run the configure utility I get the message that the c++
> compiler can not compile simple c programs. Any ideas?
(at least some) Intel compilers need the gcc-c++ distribution package. Have
you tested icpc with
31 matches
Mail list logo
