Hello!
If i use latest night snapshot:
$ ompi_info -V
Open MPI v1.9a1r32570
* In programm hello_c initialization takes ~1 min
In ompi 1.8.2rc4 and ealier it takes ~1 sec(or less)
* if i use
$mpirun --mca mca_base_env_list 'MXM_SHM_KCOPY_MODE=off,OMP_NUM_THREADS=8'
--map-by slot:pe=8 -np 1 ./h
Hi,
The default delimiter is ";" . You can change delimiter with
mca_base_env_list_delimiter.
On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 2:59 PM, Timur Ismagilov wrote:
> Hello!
> If i use latest night snapshot:
>
> $ ompi_info -V
> Open MPI v1.9a1r32570
>
>1. In programm hello_c initialization takes ~1 min
I'm also puzzled by your timing statement - I can't replicate it:
07:41:43 $ time mpirun -n 1 ./hello_c
Hello, world, I am 0 of 1, (Open MPI v1.9a1, package: Open MPI rhc@bend001
Distribution, ident: 1.9a1r32577, repo rev: r32577, Unreleased developer copy,
125)
real0m0.547s
user0m0.04
Hi,
I've a quick question about the usage of Java binding.
Say there's a 2 dimensional double array (size m x n) that needs to be sent
to another rank. I see two options to get this done,
1. Copy values to a direct buffer of size m*n and send it
2. Copy values to a 1D array of size m*n and send
El 22/08/14 17:10, Saliya Ekanayake escribió:
Hi,
I've a quick question about the usage of Java binding.
Say there's a 2 dimensional double array (size m x n) that needs to be
sent to another rank. I see two options to get this done,
1. Copy values to a direct buffer of size m*n and send it
Thank you Oscar for the detailed information, but I'm still wondering how
would the copying in 2 would be different than what's done here with
copying to a buffer.
On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 2:17 PM, Oscar Vega-Gisbert
wrote:
> El 22/08/14 17:10, Saliya Ekanayake escribió:
>
> Hi,
>>
>> I've a qu
El 22/08/14 20:44, Saliya Ekanayake escribió:
Thank you Oscar for the detailed information, but I'm still wondering
how would the copying in 2 would be different than what's done here
with copying to a buffer.
If you have a buffer array like this:
double buffer[] = new double[m * n];
Cop
My apologies, I think I wasn't clear on my question. My question was, given
that copying of data is necessary in both approaches (either by the system
with arrays or by programmer with buffers), is there a foreseeable
performance difference in terms of performance considering the time it
takes for
On 08/22/2014 10:10 AM, Saliya Ekanayake wrote:
Hi,
I've a quick question about the usage of Java binding.
Say there's a 2 dimensional double array (size m x n) that needs to be
sent to another rank. I see two options to get this done,
1. Copy values to a direct buffer of size m*n and send i
Yes, these are all MPI_DOUBLE
On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 3:38 PM, Rob Latham wrote:
>
>
> On 08/22/2014 10:10 AM, Saliya Ekanayake wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I've a quick question about the usage of Java binding.
>>
>> Say there's a 2 dimensional double array (size m x n) that needs to be
>> sent to an
On 08/22/2014 02:40 PM, Saliya Ekanayake wrote:
Yes, these are all MPI_DOUBLE
well, yeah, but since you are talking about copying into a "direct
buffer" there must be something tricker about the layout than just N*M
doubles.
sometimes people allocate 2d arrays by allocating one array of N
Please find inline comments.
On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 3:45 PM, Rob Latham wrote:
>
>
> On 08/22/2014 02:40 PM, Saliya Ekanayake wrote:
>
>> Yes, these are all MPI_DOUBLE
>>
>
> well, yeah, but since you are talking about copying into a "direct buffer"
> there must be something tricker about the
12 matches
Mail list logo
