Re: [OMPI users] bug in MPI_File_set_view?

Hi, I installed and tried with version 1.8.1 but it also fails. I see the error when there are some processes without any matrix block. It's not a common situation, but this makes me feel unsure about I am not doing something wrong. The error I get is: *** Error in `./binary': free(): invalid

Re: [OMPI users] Question about scheduler support

I think Ralph's email summed it up pretty well -- we unfortunately have (at least) two distinct groups of people who install OMPI: a) those who know exactly what they want and don't want anything else b) those who don't know exactly what they want and prefer to have everything installed, and

Re: [OMPI users] unknown interface on openmpi-1.8.2a1r31742

Hi Ralph, > Just committed a potential fix to the trunk - please let me know > if it worked for you Now I get the hostnames but also a segmentation fault. tyr fd1026 101 which mpiexec /usr/local/openmpi-1.9_64_cc/bin/mpiexec tyr fd1026 102 mpiexec -np 3 --host tyr,sunpc1,linpc1 hostname

Re: [OMPI users] Question about scheduler support

Le 2014-05-15 06:29, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) a écrit : I think Ralph's email summed it up pretty well -- we unfortunately have (at least) two distinct groups of people who install OMPI: a) those who know exactly what they want and don't want anything else b) those who don't know exactly what

Re: [OMPI users] Question about scheduler support

Would a separate file that contains each scheduler option and is included by configure do the trick? It might read include-slurm=YES include-torque=YES etc. If all options are set to default to YES, then the people who want no options are satisfied, but those of us who would like to change the

Re: [OMPI users] Question about scheduler support

A file would do the trick, but from my experience of building programs, I always prefer configure options. Maybe just an option --disable-optional that disables anything that is optional and non-explicitely requested. Maxime Le 2014-05-15 08:22, Bennet Fauber a écrit : Would a separate file

Re: [OMPI users] Question about scheduler support

I’m not sure how this would apply to other options, but for the scheduler, what about no scheduler-related options defaults to everything enabled (like before), but having any explicit scheduler enable option disables by default all the other schedulers? Multiple explicit enable options would

Re: [OMPI users] bug in MPI_File_set_view?

could you try just for curiosity to force to use OMPIO? e.g. mpirun --mca io ompio Thanks Edgar On 5/15/2014 3:56 AM, CANELA-XANDRI Oriol wrote: > Hi, I installed and tried with version 1.8.1 but it also fails. I see the > error when there are some processes without any matrix block. It's

Re: [OMPI users] Question about scheduler support

These are all good points -- thanks for the feedback. Just to be clear: my point about the menu system was to generate file that could be used for subsequent installs, very specifically targeted at those who want/need scriptable installations. One possible scenario could be: you download

Re: [OMPI users] Build failure on scientific linux 5.4

This worked, thank you. A simple CFLAGS="-fgnu89-inline" ./configure did the trick. On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 6:18 PM, Ralph Castain wrote: > Just sniffing around the web, I found that this is a problem caused by > newer versions of gcc. One reporter stated that they

Re: [OMPI users] Question about scheduler support

Hi List Sorry, but I confess I am having a hard time to understand all the fuss about this. At least in OMPI 1.6.5 there are already two configure options that just knock out support for slurm and loadleveler if they are set to "no", hopefully for the joy of everybody that want lean and mean

Re: [OMPI users] Question about scheduler support

Hi Gus The issue is that you have to work thru all the various components (leafing thru the code base) to construct a list of all the things you *don't* want to build. By default, we build *everything*, so there is no current method to simply "build only what I want". For those building

Re: [OMPI users] How to replace --cpus-per-proc by --map-by

We're open to suggestion, really - just need some help identifying the best way to get this info out there. well, OpenMPI information is fragmented and sprayed all over. In some places, there is mention of a wiki to be updated with an explanation; for other things, a consumer needs to wander

Re: [OMPI users] unknown interface on openmpi-1.8.2a1r31742

This bug should be fixed in tonight's tarball, BTW. On May 15, 2014, at 9:19 AM, Ralph Castain wrote: > It is an unrelated bug introduced by a different commit - causing mpirun to > segfault upon termination. The fact that you got the hostname to run > indicates that this

[OMPI users] openMPI in 64 bit

Hi, I have been using openMPI for my application with intel visual fortran. The version that I am currently using is openMPI-1.6.2. It works fine iwth fortran code compiled in 32bit and run it with openMPI 32 bit files. However recently I moved to a 64 bit machine and even though I could compile

[OMPI users] Using PMI as RTE component

Hello, I am trying to utilize pmi instead of orte, but I come across the following problem. I do configure using --with-slurm=[slurm installation path] and --with-pmi=[slurm installation path]. After compiling, I run the executable using: $srun -n 2 --mpi=pmi2 ./executable However, this still

Re: [OMPI users] Using PMI as RTE component

What do you mean "goes through orte component"? It will still call into the orte code base, but will use PMI to do the modex. On May 15, 2014, at 12:54 PM, Hadi Montakhabi wrote: > Hello, > > I am trying to utilize pmi instead of orte, but I come across the

Re: [OMPI users] Using PMI as RTE component

By "goes through orte component", I meant it does go into rte_orte_open function in rte_orte_component.c. Let me try to formulate my question in a different way: There are two components in the rte framework, namely orte and pmi. The question is whether pmi could be used independent from orte? Or

Re: [OMPI users] openMPI in 64 bit

On 5/15/2014 3:13 PM, Ajay Nair wrote: I have been using openMPI for my application with intel visual fortran. The version that I am currently using is openMPI-1.6.2. It works fine iwth fortran code compiled in 32bit and run it with openMPI 32 bit files. However recently I moved to a 64 bit

Re: [OMPI users] How to replace --cpus-per-proc by --map-by

I'm not sure of the issue, but so far as I'm aware the cpus-per-proc functionality continued to work thru all those releases and into today. Yes, the syntax changed during the 1.7 series to reflect a broader desire to consolidate options into something that could be contained in a minimum

Re: [OMPI users] Using PMI as RTE component

I wouldn't trust that PMI component in the RTE framework - it was only created as a test example for that framework. It is routinely broken and not maintained, and can only be used if forced. Is this on the trunk? Or are you using the 1.8 series? If the latter, that component shouldn't even be

Re: [OMPI users] openMPI in 64 bit

This is on a Windows box? If so, I don't know if anyone built/posted a 64-bit release version for Windows (you might check the OMPI site and see if there is something specific for 64-bit), and we don't support Windows directly any more. You might also look at the cygwin site for a downloadable

Re: [OMPI users] Question about scheduler support

Em 15-05-2014 07:29, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) escreveu: I think Ralph's email summed it up pretty well -- we unfortunately have (at least) two distinct groups of people who install OMPI: a) those who know exactly what they want and don't want anything else b) those who don't know exactly what

Re: [OMPI users] Question about scheduler support

Please allow me to chip in my $0.02 and suggest to not reinvent the wheel, but instead consider to migrate the build system to cmake : http://www.cmake.org/ I agree that menu-wise, CMake does a pretty good job with ccmake, and is much, much easier to create than autoconf/automake/m4 stuff

Re: [OMPI users] Question about scheduler support

On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 06:34:20PM -0300, Fabricio Cannini wrote: > Em 15-05-2014 07:29, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) escreveu: > >I think Ralph's email summed it up pretty well -- we unfortunately have (at > >least) two distinct groups of people who install OMPI: > > > >a) those who know exactly what

Re: [OMPI users] Question about scheduler support

On May 15, 2014, at 2:34 PM, Fabricio Cannini wrote: > Em 15-05-2014 07:29, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) escreveu: >> I think Ralph's email summed it up pretty well -- we unfortunately have (at >> least) two distinct groups of people who install OMPI: >> >> a) those who know

Re: [OMPI users] Question about scheduler support

Em 15-05-2014 18:40, Ralph Castain escreveu: On May 15, 2014, at 2:34 PM, Fabricio Cannini wrote: Em 15-05-2014 07:29, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) escreveu: I think Ralph's email summed it up pretty well -- we unfortunately have (at least) two distinct groups of people who

Re: [OMPI users] Question about scheduler support

On May 15, 2014, at 6:14 PM, Fabricio Cannini wrote: > Alright, but now I'm curious as to why you decided against it. > Could please elaborate on it a bit ? OMPI has a long, deep history with the GNU Autotools. It's a very long, complicated story, but the high points are:

Re: [OMPI users] Question about scheduler support

Le 2014-05-15 18:27, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) a écrit : On May 15, 2014, at 6:14 PM, Fabricio Cannini wrote: Alright, but now I'm curious as to why you decided against it. Could please elaborate on it a bit ? OMPI has a long, deep history with the GNU Autotools. It's a

Re: [OMPI users] Question about scheduler support

On May 15, 2014, at 4:15 PM, Maxime Boissonneault wrote: > Le 2014-05-15 18:27, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) a écrit : >> On May 15, 2014, at 6:14 PM, Fabricio Cannini wrote: >> >>> Alright, but now I'm curious as to why you decided

Re: [OMPI users] Question about scheduler support

Em 15-05-2014 20:15, Maxime Boissonneault escreveu: Le 2014-05-15 18:27, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) a écrit : On May 15, 2014, at 6:14 PM, Fabricio Cannini wrote: Alright, but now I'm curious as to why you decided against it. Could please elaborate on it a bit ? OMPI has a

Re: [OMPI users] Question about scheduler support

Em 15-05-2014 20:48, Ralph Castain escreveu: Nobody is disagreeing that one could find a way to make CMake work - all we are saying is that (a) CMake has issues too, just like autotools, and (b) we have yet to see a compelling reason to undertake the transition...which would have to be a

Re: [OMPI users] ierr vs ierror in F90 mpi module

Hi Jeff and the list, A year ago, we had the discussion appended below. I just downloaded v1.8.1 and the F90 module is still very broken. And once again I am having to modify my local version. (+1 for open source!) Will it be fixed in v1.8.2? Configure is using the "use-mpi-tkr" version

Re: [OMPI users] Using PMI as RTE component

Hadi, Is your job launching and executing normally? During the launch, frameworks are initialized by opening all components, selecting the desired one, and closing the others. I think you're just seeing components being opened, queried, and ultimately closed. The important thing is knowing if PMI

Re: [OMPI users] Using PMI as RTE component

Josh - he's talking about the PMI component in ompi/mca/rte. It generally doesn't work. On May 15, 2014, at 5:15 PM, Joshua Ladd wrote: > Hadi, > > Is your job launching and executing normally? During the launch, frameworks > are initialized by opening all components,

Re: [OMPI users] ierr vs ierror in F90 mpi module

you might try the nightly 1.8.2 build - there were some additional patches to fix the darned tkr support. I'm afraid getting all the various compilers to work correctly with it has been a major pain. On May 15, 2014, at 5:01 PM, W Spector wrote: > Hi Jeff and the list, >