Re: [OMPI devel] require newer autoconf?

On Mar 17, 2009, at 9:06 PM, Brian Barrett wrote: I'd rather not. I have a couple of platforms with 2.59 installed, but not 2.60+. I really don't want to have to install my own autotools because of some bug that doesn't affect me. I don't, however, have a problem with forcing users to

Re: [OMPI devel] require newer autoconf?

I'd rather not. I have a couple of platforms with 2.59 installed, but not 2.60+. I really don't want to have to install my own autotools because of some bug that doesn't affect me. I don't, however, have a problem with forcing users to upgrade in order to get support for build-related

[OMPI devel] require newer autoconf?

Per this thread: http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/users/2009/03/8402.php It took a *lng* time to figure out that an outdated Autoconf install was the culprit of the "restrict" mess. The issue is that somewhere between v2.61 and v2.63, Autoconf changed the order of looking

Re: [OMPI devel] OMPI vs Scali performance comparisons

Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) wrote: Re: [OMPI devel] OMPI vs Scali performance comparisons I still think that the pml fast path fixes would be good. As do I.  Again, I think one needs to go to the BTL sendi as soon as possible after entering the PML, which raised those thorny

Re: [OMPI devel] OMPI vs Scali performance comparisons

The default values for the large message fragments are not optimized for the new generation processors. This might be something to investigate, in order to see if we can have the same bandwidth as they do or not. george. On Mar 17, 2009, at 18:23 , Eugene Loh wrote: A colleague of mine

Re: [OMPI devel] OMPI vs Scali performance comparisons

I still think that the pml fast path fixes would be good. -jms Sent from my PDA. No type good. - Original Message - From: devel-boun...@open-mpi.org Sent: Tue Mar 17 18:23:18 2009 Subject: [OMPI devel] OMPI vs Scali performance comparisons A colleague of

[OMPI devel] RFC: Final cleanup of included headers

What: Delete unused headers (intrusive) Why: Get rid of needlessly included headers Where:On trunk -- but I am playing safe -- hence this RFC When: Apply on trunk on 20.3. (in the evening before MTT tar ball, but not to disturb other people's work) Timeout:

[OMPI devel] OMPI vs Scali performance comparisons

A colleague of mine ran some microkernels on an 8-way Barcelona box (Sun x2200M2 at 2.3 GHz). Here are some performance comparisons with Scali. The performance tests are modified versions of the HPCC pingpong tests. The OMPI version is the trunk with my "single-queue" fixes... otherwise,