On Aug 29, 2007, at 7:12 AM, Josh Hursey wrote:
- We need a well defined way to see what collective implementation
was used. Meaning that there are N AlltoAll collective
implementations in the 'tuned' component we need to know when
looking at the graph which one of the N we are looking at for
Sorry for the delay in reply.
On Aug 27, 2007, at 6:16 PM, Jeff Squyres wrote:
- We need a well defined way to see what collective implementation
was used. Meaning that there are N AlltoAll collective
implementations in the 'tuned' component we need to know when
looking
at the graph which on
On Mon, Aug/27/2007 06:16:14PM, Jeff Squyres wrote:
> On Aug 27, 2007, at 12:06 PM, Ethan Mallove wrote:
>
> >> - It would be really useful to 'zoom' into sections of the graph.
> >> Primarily restricting the x-axis (Message Size), but also having the
> >> ability to restrict the y-axis (time)
>
On Aug 27, 2007, at 12:06 PM, Ethan Mallove wrote:
- It would be really useful to 'zoom' into sections of the graph.
Primarily restricting the x-axis (Message Size), but also having the
ability to restrict the y-axis (time)
K.
https://svn.open-mpi.org/trac/mtt/ticket/153
- Calling the y-axi
On Mon, Aug/27/2007 10:33:26AM, Josh Hursey wrote:
> Jeff asked me if I would talk to Rich and folks at IU on Friday about
> the performance graphs. Below are my notes from that meeting:
>
> - It would be really useful to 'zoom' into sections of the graph.
> Primarily restricting the x-axis (M
A few more notes I forgot:
- The performance graphs are sometimes placed side-by-side instead of
stacked on top of one another. This shinks the x-axis, and is
undesirable. They would prefer that the graphs be always stacked on
top of one another.
- They lamented the lack of the cherry pic
