Open MPI logo

Open MPI User's 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 users] printf and scanf problem of C code compiled with Open MPI
From: Prentice Bisbal (prentice_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-03-29 14:38:10


On 03/29/2011 01:29 PM, Meilin Bai wrote:
> Dear open-mpi users:
>
> I come across a little problem when running a MPI C program compiled
> with Open MPI 1.4.3. A part of codes as follows:
>
> MPI_Init(&argc, &argv);
> MPI_Comm_size(MPI_COMM_WORLD, &numprocs);
> MPI_Comm_rank(MPI_COMM_WORLD, &myid);
> MPI_Get_processor_name(processor_name, &namelen);
> if (myid == 0) {
> printf("Please give N= ");
> //fflush(stdout);
> scanf("%d", &n);
> startwtime = MPI_Wtime();
> }
>
> If comment out the sentence of "fflush(stdout);", it doesn't print out
> the message till I input an integer n. And if I add the fflush function
> between them, it works as expected, though comsumming time obviously.
>
> However, when I compiled it with Mpich2-1.3.2p1, without fflush function
> in the code, it works correctly.
>
> Can anyone know what the matter is.
>

The Open MPI Developers (Jeff, Ralph, etc) can confirm this:

The MPI standard doesn't have a lot of strict requirements for I/O
behavior like this, so implementations are allowed to buffer I/O if they
want. There is nothing wrong with requiring fflush(stdout) in order to
get the behavior you want. In fact, if you check some text books on MPI
programming, I'm pretty sure they recommend using fflush to minimize
this problem.

MPICH behaves differently because its developers made different design
choices.

Neither behavior is "wrong".

-- 
Prentice