[OMPI users] GPU and CPU timing - OpenMPI and Thrust

2012-05-07 Thread Rohan Deshpande
I am running MPI and Thrust code on a cluster and measuring time for calculations. My MPI code - #include "mpi.h" #include #include #include #include #include #include #define MASTER 0 #define ARRAYSIZE 2000 int

Re: [OMPI users] problem in installation

2012-05-07 Thread Jeff Squyres (jsquyres)
On May 7, 2012, at 8:32 AM, ahmed lasheen wrote: > In installation I used the following command > ./configure --prefix=/usr/local/open_mpi_pgi/ F77=pgf77 FC=pgf90 ; Try also listing CC=pgcc and CXX=pgCC. -- Jeff Squyres jsquy...@cisco.com For corporate legal information go to:

Re: [OMPI users] Why is the eager limit set to 12K?

2012-05-07 Thread Jeff Squyres (jsquyres)
I *believe* that this value came out of IB hardware history. I.e., when we wrote the openib BTL, some empirical testing showed that 12k was a good value. On May 7, 2012, at 9:25 AM, Simone Pellegrini wrote: > Hello, > I have one of those 1M dollar questions I guess, but why the eager limit >

Re: [OMPI users] Regarding the execution time calculation

2012-05-07 Thread Jingcha Joba
Jeff, So in the above stated example, end-start will be: + 20ms ? (time slice of P2 + P3 = 20ms) On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 1:42 PM, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) wrote: > On May 7, 2012, at 2:39 PM, Jingcha Joba wrote: > > > OK.This explains that if a process gets "migrated" from

Re: [OMPI users] Regarding the execution time calculation

2012-05-07 Thread Jeff Squyres (jsquyres)
On May 7, 2012, at 2:39 PM, Jingcha Joba wrote: > OK.This explains that if a process gets "migrated" from one CPU to another, > the time is not "affected". But it still doesn't explain if the process gets > scheduled back to the same CPU. MPI_Wtime() doesn't tell you any of this stuff. It

Re: [OMPI users] open-mpi.org site

2012-05-07 Thread Jeff Squyres (jsquyres)
Problem fixed. On May 7, 2012, at 4:22 PM, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) wrote: > Gah! Red alert! Red alert! > > (I'll ping the sysadmins ASAP -- thanks for the heads up) > > > On May 7, 2012, at 4:13 PM, David Turner wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> Currently getting "You don't have permission to

Re: [OMPI users] open-mpi.org site

2012-05-07 Thread Jeff Squyres (jsquyres)
Gah! Red alert! Red alert! (I'll ping the sysadmins ASAP -- thanks for the heads up) On May 7, 2012, at 4:13 PM, David Turner wrote: > Hi all, > > Currently getting "You don't have permission to access / on this > server" on the www.open-mpi-org website. > > -- > Best regards, > > David

[OMPI users] open-mpi.org site

2012-05-07 Thread David Turner
Hi all, Currently getting "You don't have permission to access / on this server" on the www.open-mpi-org website. -- Best regards, David Turner User Services Groupemail: dptur...@lbl.gov NERSC Division phone: (510) 486-4027 Lawrence Berkeley Labfax: (510) 486-4316

Re: [OMPI users] Regarding the execution time calculation

2012-05-07 Thread Jingcha Joba
OK.This explains that if a process gets "migrated" from one CPU to another, the time is not "affected". But it still doesn't explain if the process gets scheduled back to the same CPU. Just in case I have not explained my question clearly, let me explain it from the schedular's perspective. Lets

[OMPI users] Why is the eager limit set to 12K?

2012-05-07 Thread Simone Pellegrini
Hello, I have one of those 1M dollar questions I guess, but why the eager limit threshold for Infiniband is set to 12KB by default in OpenMPI? I would like to know where this value comes from. I am not wondering whether this is a good setting for this parameter, but just why this is

[OMPI users] problem in installation

2012-05-07 Thread ahmed lasheen
Hello all I am new to open-mpi and I am trying to install it with pgi compiler but I found the following error. pgf90-Error-Unknown switch: -pthread make[4]: *** [libmpi_f90.la] Error 1 In installation I used the following command ./configure --prefix=/usr/local/open_mpi_pgi/ F77=pgf77

Re: [OMPI users] MPI over tcp

2012-05-07 Thread Jeff Squyres (jsquyres)
On May 4, 2012, at 6:43 PM, Don Armstrong wrote: > Even though this might have seemed like a stupid question, it put me > onto the right track. Apparently, mca_btl_tcp_endpoint_accept (or > similar) is unable to handle multiple IP addresses on the same > interface, and rejects the connection.