Open MPI logo

Open MPI Development Mailing List Archives

  |   Home   |   Support   |   FAQ   |   all Development mailing list

Subject: Re: [OMPI devel] One orted for each process on the same host - any problem?
From: Ralph Castain (rhc_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-05-04 19:59:38


In that case, why not just directly launch the processes without the orted? We do it with slurm and even have the ability to do it with torque - so it could be done.

See the orte/mca/ess/slurmd component for an example of how to do so.

On May 4, 2011, at 4:55 PM, Tony Lam wrote:

> Hi Thomas,
>
> We need to track job resource usage in our resource manager for
> accounting and resource policy enforcement, sharing single orted
> process in multiple jobs makes the tracking much complicated. We don't
> enforce other restrictions, and I'll appreciate any suggestion on how
> to resolve this or work around this.
>
> We have thought about mapping all processes from a mpirun into a
> single job to simplify job resource tracking, but that will require much spread changes in our software.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Tony
>
>
> On 05/04/11 15:34, Thomas Herault wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Could you explain why you would like one orted on top of each MPI process?
>> There are some situations, like resource usage limitation / accounting, that are possible to solve without changing the one daemon per node deployment.
>> Or do you enforce other kinds of restrictions on the orted process? Why wouldn't it be able to launch more than one MPI process / why would not that be desirable?
>>
>> Bests,
>> Thomas
>>
>> Le 4 mai 2011 à 15:51, Tony Lam a écrit :
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I understand a single orted is shared by all MPI processes from the same communicator on each execution host, does anyone see any problem that MPI/OMPI may have problem with each process has its owner orted? My guess it is less efficient in terms of MPI communication and memory foot print, but for simplification of our integration with OMPI, launching one orted for each MPI process is much easier to do.
>>>
>>> I will appreciate if someone can confirm this setup will or will not work.
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>> Tony
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list
> devel_at_[hidden]
> http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel