Hi,
Sorry for not replying sooner.
I'm taliking with the authors (they are not in this list) and
will request linking the PDF soon if they allowed.
Takahiro Kawashima,
MPI development team,
Fujitsu
> Our policy so far was that adding a paper to the list of publication on the
> Open MPI website
Check the HACKING file in the top-level directory if you need some assistance
on how to upgrade your Autoconf/Automake/Libtool.
On Jan 9, 2013, at 9:27 PM, Ralph Castain
wrote:
> I'm pretty sure we are at autoconf 2.69 now. You might want to upgrade it,
> and ensure
> Yes -- IIRC, the Java interface isn't really dependent upon anything specific
> in the back-end C implementation of Open MPI. So I'm guessing/assuming that
> if you can build it, it should work against the 1.6 OMPI C engine just fine.
Sounds good :-) I'm going to try to build it anyway, and
+1
This sounds fine to me.
On Jan 3, 2013, at 2:46 PM, Brice Goglin wrote:
> Hello,
>
> hwloc users are supposed to configure/build topologies like this:
> hwloc_topology_init()
> /* all configuration calls */
> hwloc_topology_set_xml()
> hwloc_topology_set_flags()
Committed in https://svn.open-mpi.org/trac/ompi/changeset/27785, and I filed
CMRs to get this fix in 1.6.4 and 1.7.
On Jan 10, 2013, at 9:23 AM, Phil Carns
wrote:
> Thanks Jeff. I tested the patch just now using Open MPI SVN trunk revision
> 27784. I was able to
Thanks Jeff. I tested the patch just now using Open MPI SVN trunk
revision 27784. I was able to instrument an application without any
trouble at all, and the patch looks great.
I definitely understand the memory registration cache pain. I've
dabbled in network abstractions for file systems
On Jan 9, 2013, at 10:30 PM, Yoshiki SATO
wrote:
> The 1.7's Java implementation under ompi/mpi/java seem to be able to build up
> independently. Do you think we can build just them and run it (via
> prunjava?) with our custom OpenMPI build based on 1.6?
Yes --
Our policy so far was that adding a paper to the list of publication on the
Open MPI website was a discretionary action at the authors' request. I don't
see any compelling reason to change. Moreover, Fujitsu being a contributor of
the Open MPI community, there is no obstacle of adding a link to