On Tue, 2 Aug 2011 11:54:37 -0700, Michel Bourget <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > It isn't exactly clear what the strack() interface you are proposing
> > would do. Is this a replacement for srun?
> 
> 
> Hello Mark,
> 
> No. Just like sattach() isn't a replacement to srun().

Ok, sorry I probably just didn't read the description correctly.

 
> > Why not just have SGI MPI
> > users use your mpirun under a SLURM allocation?
> 
> The contractual requirement we have is 'srun a.out', ie NO mpirun.
> 

Heh, ok fair enough.

> > If srun isn't really
> > launching all tasks, then there really isn't that much benefit to
> > using srun that I can see.
> >
> 
> The SGI MPI plugin takes care of that by translating SLURM_STEP_NODELIST
> and SLURM_STEP_TASKS_PER_NODE into appropriate sgimpi specifications.
> Then , it is launched only when SLURM_PROCID=0. I can see similarities with
> the "HAVE_FRONT_END" concept.
> 
> > If you want the MPI launcher to be launched with srun, your mpirun
> > could run something like "srun -N1 -n1 mpi_launcher..."
> >
> > Or maybe that is what you are already proposing?
> 
> I am proposing something like sattach(). strack( job_it, step_id , ... )
> 
> Given valid job_id.step_id pair, it would teach slurmd-or-slurmstepd 
> currently loaded
> plugins to track( add, replace ? ) the current pid/pgid/whatnot ( or 
> supplied values ).
> 
> I mention "replace" because  we could think the initial  slurmstepd 
> could go away while another instance of slurmstepd ( triggered by an 
> strack ) kicks in.
> 
> I mention "add" because we could think the initial slurmstepd stays 
> there while another parallel slurmstepd is kicked in to monitor another 
> pid/pgid pairs. Issue with that is linuxproc/job_acct_gather are single 
> container_id oriented. Or am I wrong completely ?


Ok, I think I understand what you are proposing with strack(), but it
might help if you walk through an MPI launch using your proposed
strack() interface.

I am still not 100% sure why the SGI mpi launcher would need something
like strack, but that probably isn't your fault. I'm sorry if I'm being
unnecessarily dense.

mark


Reply via email to