Open MPI logo

Open MPI Development Mailing List Archives

  |   Home   |   Support   |   FAQ   |  

This web mail archive is frozen.

This page is part of a frozen web archive of this mailing list.

You can still navigate around this archive, but know that no new mails have been added to it since July of 2016.

Click here to be taken to the new web archives of this list; it includes all the mails that are in this frozen archive plus all new mails that have been sent to the list since it was migrated to the new archives.

Subject: Re: [OMPI devel] PLM consistency: priority
From: Aurélien Bouteiller (bouteill_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-07-11 11:07:16

We don't want the user to have to select by hand the best PML. The
logic inside the current selection process selects the best pml for
the underlying network. However changing the priority is pretty
meaningless from the user's point of view. So while retaining the
selection process including priorities, we might want to remove the
priority parameter, and use only the pml=ob1,cm syntax from the user's
point of view.


Le 11 juil. 08 à 10:56, Ralph H Castain a écrit :

> Okay, another fun one. Some of the PLM modules use MCA params to
> adjust
> their relative selection priority. This can lead to very unexpected
> behavior
> as which module gets selected will depend on the priorities of the
> other
> selectable modules - which changes from release to release as people
> independently make adjustments and/or new modules are added.
> Fortunately, this doesn't bite us too often since many environments
> only
> support one module, and since there is nothing to tell the user that
> the plm
> module whose priority they raised actually -didn't- get used!
> However, in the interest of "least astonishment", some of us working
> on the
> RTE had changed our coding approach to avoid this confusion. Given
> that we
> have this nice mca component select logic that takes the specified
> module -
> i.e., "-mca plm foo" always yields foo if it can run, or errors out
> if it
> can't - then the safest course is to remove MCA params that adjust
> module
> priorities and have the user simply tell us which module they want
> us to
> use.
> Do we want to make this consistent, at least in the PLM? Or do you
> want to
> leave the user guessing? :-)
> Ralph
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list
> devel_at_[hidden]