On Thu, Sep/18/2008 10:11:19AM, Tim Mattox wrote: > I Guess I should comment on Jeff's comments too. > > On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 9:00 AM, Jeff Squyres <jsquy...@cisco.com> wrote: > > On Sep 16, 2008, at 12:07 PM, Ethan Mallove wrote: > > > >> What happens if one uses --local-scratch, but leaves out the > >> --scratch option? In this case, I think MTT should assume > >> --scratch is the same as --local-scratch. > > > > In this case, my $0.02 is that it should be an error. --scratch implies a > > --local-scatch, but I don't think the implication should go the other way. > > Yeah, I agree, especially if we call it --mpi-install-scratch. > > >> Could the "local" in --local-scratch ever be misleading? > >> Couldn't a user ever use a mounted filesystem that's faster > >> than all their local filesystem? Should it be > >> --fast-scratch? > > > > Mmm... good point. What if we name it what it really is: > > --mpi-install-scratch? This also opens the door for other phase scratches > > if we ever want them. And it keeps everything consistent and simple (from > > the user's point of view). > > Ah, yeah, ok, now I see why you wouldl call it --mpi-install-scratch, so > that it matches the MTT ini section name. Sure, that works for me. >
Since this does seem like a feature that should eventually propogate to all the other phases (except for Test run), what will we call the option to group all the fast phase scratches? -Ethan > >> For future work, how about --scratch taking a (CSV?) list of > >> scratch directories. MTT then does a quick check for which > >> is the fastest filesystem (if such a check is > >> possible/feasible), and proceeds accordingly. That is, doing > >> everything it possible can in a fast scratch (builds, > >> writing out metadata, etc.), and installing the MPI(s) into > >> the slow mounted scratch. Would this be possible? > > > > Hmm. I'm not quite sure how that would work -- "fastest" is a hard thing to > > determine. What is "fastest" at this moment may be "slowest" 2 minutes from > > now, for example. > > Yeah, I claim that auto-detecting file system speed is outside the > scope of MTT. :-) > > > I'm looking at the patch in detail now... sorry for the delay... > > > > -- > > Jeff Squyres > > Cisco Systems > > > > _______________________________________________ > > mtt-users mailing list > > mtt-us...@open-mpi.org > > http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mtt-users > > > > > > -- > Tim Mattox, Ph.D. - http://homepage.mac.com/tmattox/ > tmat...@gmail.com || timat...@open-mpi.org > I'm a bright... http://www.the-brights.net/ > _______________________________________________ > mtt-users mailing list > mtt-us...@open-mpi.org > http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mtt-users