HI Gilles,

First a disclaimer - I do not know what the intended design was nor where
the design document
for this feature is located.

However, I would certainly prefer that if the communicator size wasn't
specifically specified
in the rule file, a fall back do-no-harm algorithm would be selected.

Following the KISS principal I would go with 2) returning a NULL rule when
there is no matching size in the rule file for the communicator in question.

Howard


2015-05-19 20:05 GMT-06:00 Gilles Gouaillardet <gil...@rist.or.jp>:

> Folks,
>
> this is a follow-up of a discussion on the user ML started at
> http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/users/2015/05/26882.php
>
> 1) it turns out the dynamic rule filename must be "sorted" :
> - rules must be sorted by communicator size
> - within a given communicator size, rules must be sorted by message size
>
> if not, some rules are silently skipped, which is counter intuitive imho.
>
>
> 2) the algo picks the rule with the higher communicator size less or equal
> than the current communicator size (same thing for message size).
> The exception is if there are no such rule, the first rule is selected.
> for example, if the config file has rules for comm size 4, 8 and 16
> comm size 4 => pick rule for comm size 4
> comm size 5 => pick rule for comm 4
> comm size 8 => pick rule for comm 8
> *but*
> comm size 2 => pick rule for comm size 4 (!)
> imho, this is also counter intuitive.
> i would have expected no rule is picked and the default behaviour is used.
>
> Same thing applies for message sizes.
>
> Is this the intended design ?
>
> 1) can be solved by inserting some qsort calls after parsing the config
> file.
> 2) can be solved by returning a NULL rule instead of the first rule ( or
> by automatically inserting a rule for comm size 0 (and message size 0) if
> no such rule is present in the config file).
>
> any thoughts ?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Gilles
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list
> de...@open-mpi.org
> Subscription: http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
> Link to this post:
> http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/devel/2015/05/17425.php
>

Reply via email to