Open MPI logo

Open MPI Development Mailing List Archives

  |   Home   |   Support   |   FAQ   |   all Development mailing list

From: Pak Lui (Pak.Lui_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-05-31 23:24:12


okay, sorry that I might have confused you before, but at least we are
all clear about the issues. It now sounds like I'll have to try
restricting the number of times the "qrsh" gets called in the sge pls
module for the current release as I initially though, and revisit this
issue later in ORTE 2.0.

Ralph Castain wrote:
> Hmmm...no, it appears that we are not talking about the same problem at
> all. An internal comm_spawn is not at all equivalent to an external
> execution of another mpirun command - even though the same functions may
> get called, there is a very large fundamental difference between the two
> scenarios: one executes inside of the same universe, and the other does not.
>
> I didn't understand that this was a comm_spawn problem - my bad.
>
> You can disregard the entire prior discussion - this has nothing to do
> with persistent vs non-persistent orteds. Everything is executing just
> fine within one common universe.
>
> The problem is a known issue with comm_spawn. The current implementation
> was a pre-production prototype - we simply have not had the time to go
> back and clean it all up. Hence, it works fine in *most* cases, but has
> definite problems in the more unusual cases. Unfortunately, SGE falls
> into that latter category because it imposes a strict limit on the
> available resources.
>
> I actually noted the problem you are encountering in my OpenRTE 2.0
> documentation, though that doesn't help here. The problem is that the
> majority of our systems do *not* count the daemons against any resource
> reservation. Hence, in the current implementation of the mapper and
> other resource manager components, we never count the daemons against
> the number of process slots available to us.
>
> This is further aggravated by two other facts:
>
> (a) currently, we always start our mapping from the first node in the
> reservation list, even when we comm_spawn multiple times. Hence, we
> always drop the first process on the first node - instead of starting
> where we last left off.
>
> (b) our rsh/ssh launcher doesn't know how to re-use daemons on the
> compute nodes, so it always launches a new one every time it launches
> processes on the node. Hence, the number of "uncounted" processes on a
> node rises with each launch. A comm_spawn counts as a single launch in
> your environment, as does mpirun - thus, if your application does a
> comm_spawn, you wind up with two (uncounted) daemons + some number of
> application processes trying to run on each node.
>
> Fixing this would be a significant effort that I believe is best put off
> until version 2.0. It requires a fairly significant overhaul of the
> rsh/ssh launcher, as well as several of the default ras and rmap base
> component support functions. Since these are getting overhauled anyway
> in the next major version, we had decided a while ago to hold off fixing
> the base problem of comm_spawn until that time.
>
> Of course, that decision may need to be revisited - depends just how big
> an issue this is, relative release dates, other commitments, etc. etc.
>
> Ralph
>
>
> Pak Lui wrote:
>
>> Ralph Castain wrote:
>>
>>>>> First, the fact that an orted already exists on a node is not
>>>>> sufficient to allow us to use it again for another application. The
>>>>> orted must be persistent or else we do not allow a new application
>>>>> to re-use it. This is required because the existing orted will go
>>>>> away when its original application is done executing - if we use it
>>>>> as our parent to launch another child, then the new application
>>>>> process will "die" when the original one completes. Obviously, that
>>>>> isn't desirable.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> okay. I used to think that if orted is able to stay and fork other
>>>> processes, but I didn't realize orted will go away once the parent
>>>> process finishes.
>>>
>>>
>>> I don't know how to get around this problem for non-persistent
>>> orteds. Perhaps we can devise some mechanism. The problem is that
>>> mpirun needs to exit when it finishes the associated application.
>>> Without a persistent orted, mpirun serves as the parent process for
>>> everything that is executing, including the daemons. So, for mpirun
>>> to exit, that means all of its children must also terminate.
>>
>>
>> wow, that's a thought. Do you mean that after we start a SGE
>> (interactive/batch) job, we first have the user to fire up persistent
>> orted, in order to have 'qrsh' to launch the persistent orted onto all
>> of the SGE nodes, and have them running for the duration of the SGE
>> job. So that way, the subsequent mpirun will not need to use qrsh
>> again to launch on the remote nodes. I think that may actually solve
>> the problem.
>>
>>>
>>> If we try to link one mpirun to another, then we have the problem
>>> that we must force the first mpirun to "stay alive" until the second
>>> one completes. This could be done, but seems problematic and contrary
>>> to normal user expectations.
>>
>>
>> agree, that is not good.
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Second, even though you can launch persistent orteds today, none of
>>>>> the current components in the resource management subsystems
>>>>> actually know how to use them yet. This is something we planned to
>>>>> implement in the future, but there simply hasn't been time to do so
>>>>> yet.
>>>>>
>>>>> So the bottom line is that there really is no way around the need
>>>>> to launch a new orted on each node every time the user issues an
>>>>> mpirun command.
>>>>>
>>>>> I hope that answers your question. If not, please don't hesitate to
>>>>> let me know.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for pointing out these issues. I was hoping something I
>>>> didn't know may solve my problem. I guess there may not be a good
>>>> workaround for this limitation due to SGE slots. We could try to
>>>> track and set some top limit for the number of times that qrsh can
>>>> exec, before the spawn program uses up all the available SGE slots
>>>> and errors out.
>>>
>>>
>>> Hmmm...it sounds to me like the problem here is that the second
>>> OpenRTE universe (the one created by the second mpirun) has no
>>> knowledge of what the other universe may already have done.
>>
>>
>> it sounds like a good assumption but it actually turns out that the
>> orted for both the spawner (parent) and spawnee (child) belong to the
>> same universe. So, it may not be the case as you mention.
>>
>> parent:
>> 15923 ?? S 0:00 orted --no-daemonize --bootproxy 1 --name
>> 0.0.1 --num_procs 2 --vpid_start 0 --nodename burl-ct-v440-5
>> --universe paklui_at_burl-ct-v440-5:default-universe --nsreplica
>> "0.0.0;tcp://10.8.30.128:47797" --gprreplica
>> "0.0.0;tcp://10.8.30.128:47797" --mpi-call-yield 0
>>
>> child on the same node as parent:
>> 15935 ?? S 0:00 orted --no-daemonize --bootproxy 2 --name
>> 0.0.3 --num_procs 4 --vpid_start 0 --nodename burl-ct-v440-5
>> --universe paklui_at_burl-ct-v440-5:default-universe --nsreplica
>> "0.0.0;tcp://10.8.30.128:47797" --gprreplica
>> "0.0.0;tcp://10.8.30.128:47797" --mpi-call-yield 0
>>
>> child on the different node:
>> 5563 ?? S 0:00 orted --no-daemonize --bootproxy 2 --name
>> 0.0.2 --num_procs 4 --vpid_start 0 --nodename burl-ct-v440-4
>> --universe paklui_at_burl-ct-v440-5:default-universe --nsreplica
>> "0.0.0;tcp://10.8.30.128:47797" --gprreplica
>> "0.0.0;tcp://10.8.30.128:47797" --mpi-call-yield 0
>>
>> I assume when you say the second mpirun it means internally the
>> MPI_Comm_spawn is treated as a mpirun (or orterun). I use only 1
>> mpirun to run the spawner executable, just to clarify.
>>
>> So, the RAS in the second
>>
>>> universe reads the qrsh environmental variable to see how many slots
>>> are available - and doesn't know that the other mpirun already used
>>> some.
>>
>>
>> I can definately agree with that. In fact, there's actually no easy
>> way (no env vars) to find out out many slots (for qrsh tasks) have
>> been used up already. The SGE engineer that I worked with also agrees
>> that can be useful, not just for us, but for other MPI implementations
>> out there as well. So it's something I might need to work out with them.
>>
>> I
>>
>>> assume, therefore, that the other mpirun is basically being run in
>>> the background - we don't complete it first before letting the next
>>> one begin executing?
>>
>>
>> there is only 1 mpirun, but the orted for both the parent and child
>> are actually running in parallel at the same time.
>>
>>>
>>> The only solution I can think of to that problem would be to kickoff
>>> a persistent daemon to act as the "seed" for the entire time we are
>>> in the shell (either interactive or batch). This will ensure that the
>>> knowledge of resource usage carries over from one execution to the
>>> next. We actually do this with the Eclipse folks, so I know the
>>> mechanism works. We also actually kickoff a daemon that does the
>>> launch in many of the different systems - only difference here is
>>> that we normally don't make it persistent (it is just a child of
>>> mpirun). Problem here is to figure out how to handle the persistent
>>> part of this transparently to the user.
>>>
>>> What we could do is bury this in an appropriate component somewhere
>>> (I have an idea where it might go, but need to think a little more to
>>> be sure). If this is the first mpirun within a given shell, then we
>>> kickoff a persistent orted to act as the seed and connect ourselves
>>> to it (we have functions in the system to do this already). If we are
>>> not the first mpirun, then we just connect to the existing "seed".
>>> The "seed" does all the actual launching of applications.
>>>
>>> This lets each mpirun exit as usual - only the seed keeps alive. We
>>> would need to establish a way to kill the seed when all the mpiruns
>>> are complete - sort of a "last-one-out kills the orted" procedure.
>>> That would take a little care as we don't want a race condition to
>>> creep into the system - if another mpirun is coming, but the prior
>>> one exits quickly, we don't want the seed to die just yet.
>>
>>
>> this is good information, but I haven't played around with persistent
>> daemons at all. It should all make sense after a day or two. I'll get
>> back to you on this later.
>>
>>>
>>> Hope all that helps. We may be able to resolve this in a fairly
>>> straightforward manner - I think a lot of the necessary tools are
>>> already in the system, we just need to "hook them up" appropriately
>>> for SGE.
>>
>>
>> yup, that's the goal.
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Ralph
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Pak Lui wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> When I run a spawn program over rsh/ssh, I notice that each time the
>>>>>> child program gets spawned, it will need to establish a new rsh/ssh
>>>>>> connection to the remote node to launch orted on that node, even the
>>>>>> parent executable and the orted are running on that node.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So I wonder if there is any way that we can use the parent orted to
>>>>>> launch the child program if they happen to be on the same node?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I try to compare to the spawn program to the scenario where I run
>>>>>> multiple executables in one mpirun command. For this run, I only
>>>>>> establish one connection to the remote node only, and both
>>>>>> executables shared the same remote connection.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> % ./mpirun -np 2 -host burl-ct-v440-5 -prefix `pwd`/.. sleep 12 :
>>>>>> -np 2
>>>>>> sleep 10
>>>>>> Password:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 15015 /workspace/paklui/ompi/trunk/builds/sparc32-g/bin/../bin/orted
>>>>>> --bootprox
>>>>>> 15017 sleep 12
>>>>>> 15019 sleep 12
>>>>>> 15021 sleep 10
>>>>>> 15023 sleep 10
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The reason that I want to find out if it is possible for orted to
>>>>>> launch child executable(s) without having to establish a new
>>>>>> connection, is because the number of times that I can run 'qrsh'
>>>>>> in SGE (or N1GE) is actually depended on the number of slots that
>>>>>> the user initially allocated. That the slot number corresponds to
>>>>>> the number of CPUs on a node. Each slot allows one 'qrsh' connection.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The issue is when I try to run a spawn job on a single node, or a
>>>>>> cluster of many 1-cpu nodes under SGE. The number of times that
>>>>>> the program can spawn is limited by 'qrsh', that it forbids the
>>>>>> child program to connect to the same node where the parent
>>>>>> executable's orted might be already running there.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I am curious to see if I can find some solution to the problem
>>>>>> here. I am also looking to see if there are some tricks in SGE to
>>>>>> get around this issue, but workaround I can see aren't pretty
>>>>>> though. So I welcome your questions, comments or suggestions on this.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> devel mailing list
>>> devel_at_[hidden]
>>> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
>>
>>
>>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list
> devel_at_[hidden]
> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel

-- 
Thanks,
- Pak Lui
pak.lui_at_[hidden]