I see your point, but the cons make sink the idea for me.
How about a compromise -- write up a scripty-foo to automatically download and build some of the more common benchmarks? This still makes it a trivial exercise for the user, but it avoids us needing to bundle already-popular benchmarks in OMPI (plus, they release at different schedules than us).
For extra bonus points, you could make the scripty-foo be a dumb client that downloads an XML file from www.open-mpi.org that indicates where it should *really* download and build a given benchmark from. This would allow us to "release" new benchmarks independent of Open MPI releases (e.g., if NetPIPE releases a new version, we can just update the XML file on www.open-mpi.org).
On Apr 1, 2010, at 7:14 PM, Eugene Loh wrote:
> I wanted to know what folks thought about adding a ping-pong performance
> test to the examples directory?
> Pros: This would facilitate performance sanity testing by OMPI users --
> particularly MPI neophytes. It would add something to the examples
> directory with a performance orientation. It would give us
> (devel_at_ompiorg) a known quantity when trouble shooting performance with
> users. It could conceivably raise OMPI visibility in the MPI world. It
> could be a stepping stone to developing a more complete set of MPI
> performance sanity tests with time.
> Cons: There are already many performance tests. We shouldn't be
> replicating what others do, but should be leveraging what they do.
> Other existing tests are relatively easy to use and already familiar to
> many users.
> devel mailing list
For corporate legal information go to: