Haters gotta hate.  ;-)

Kidding aside, ok, you make valid points.  So -- no tm "addition".  We just 
have to rely on people using functionality like "--with-tm" in the configure 
line to force/ensure that tm (or whatever feature) will actually get built.


> On Jan 25, 2016, at 1:31 PM, Ralph Castain <r...@open-mpi.org> wrote:
> 
> I think we would be opening a real can of worms with this idea. There are 
> environments, for example, that use PBSPro for one part of the system (e.g., 
> IO nodes), but something else for the compute section.
> 
> Personally, I'd rather follow Howard's suggestion.
> 
> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 10:21 AM, Nathan Hjelm <hje...@lanl.gov> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 05:55:20PM +0000, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) wrote:
> > Hmm.  I'm of split mind here.
> >
> > I can see what Howard is saying here -- adding complexity is usually a bad 
> > thing.
> >
> > But we have gotten these problem reports multiple times over the years: 
> > someone *thinking* that they have built with launcher support X (e.g., TM, 
> > LSF), but then figuring out later that things aren't running as expected, 
> > and after a bunch of work, figure out that it's because they didn't build 
> > with support X.
> >
> > Gilles idea actually sounds interesting -- if the tm module detect some of 
> > the sentinel PBS/TM env variables, emit a show_help() if we don't have full 
> > TM support compiled in.  This would actually save some users a bunch of 
> > time and frustration.
> >
> > --> Keep in mind that the SLRUM launcher is different, because it's all 
> > CLI-based (not API-based) and therefore we always build it (because we 
> > don't have to find headers and libraries).
> >
> > FWIW, we do have precedent of having extra MCA params for users to turn off 
> > warnings that they don't want to see.
> >
> > I guess the question here is: is there a valid use case for running in 
> > PBS/Torque and *not* wanting to use the TM launcher?
> 
> Once case comes to mind. In the case of Cray systems that unfortunately
> run Moab/Toque we can launch using either alps or torque (Howard correct
> me if I am wrong). When Sam and I originally wrote the XE support we
> used alps instead of torque. I am not entirely sure what we do now.
> 
> -Nathan
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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/2016/01/18509.php
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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/2016/01/18510.php


-- 
Jeff Squyres
jsquy...@cisco.com
For corporate legal information go to: 
http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/

Reply via email to