On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 4:47 AM, Bogdan Costescu <bcoste...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 9:15 PM, Ralph Castain <r...@open-mpi.org> wrote: > > Tracking this down has reminded me of all the reasons why I despise the > rankfile mapper... :-/ > > Thanks for all your efforts ! I'm using the rankfile mapper as this is > the documented (in the FAQ) affinity-related one at least for the > stable series. If there's a better way which I've missed, I'd be eager > to learn... > It depends on what you are trying to do. Rankfile is really only useful if you need to specify rank-by-rank precise bindings. Otherwise, you can specify bind-to-core or bind-to-socket to get a more general automatic binding pattern. You can also specify cores-per-task and get each process bound to the specified number of cores. So there are a lot of options, including rankfile. Unfortunately, I see that these options are not documented on the FAQ or the wiki. :-/ Take a look at "man mpirun" and you'll see more info about all this in the part on process binding options. > > I have created a fix for this mess and will submit it for inclusion in > 1.4. > > I've applied to a 1.4.1 tree the patches from tickets #2318 and #2321 > and I can confirm that both problems reported earlier are fixed. > Thanks - appreciate the confirmation! > > > Thanks - not your fault, so pardon the comments. Just had my fill of this > particular code since the creators of it no longer support it. > > No offense taken :-) I appreciate your efforts and I understand your > frustration about unmaintaned code. Thanks again ! > > Cheers, > Bogdan > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list > de...@open-mpi.org > http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel >
