Open MPI logo

Open MPI Development Mailing List Archives

  |   Home   |   Support   |   FAQ   |   all Development mailing list

From: Greg Watson (gwatson_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-01-30 13:37:23

On Jan 30, 2007, at 9:39 AM, Ralph H Castain wrote:

> On 1/30/07 9:24 AM, "Greg Watson" <gwatson_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> Yes, we need the hostfile information before job execution. We call
>> setup_job() before a debug job to request a process allocation for
>> the application being debugged. We use spawn() to launch a non-debug
>> application. It sounds like I should just leave things the way they
>> currently are.
>> I think we've had the discussion about bproc before, but the reason
>> we still support 1.0.2 is that the registry *is* populated with node
>> information prior to launch. This was an agreed on feature that
>> OpenMPI was to provide for PTP. I haven't been able to test 1.2 on a
>> bproc machine (since I can't get it to work), but it sounds like the
>> changes removed this functionality. Frankly, this makes OpenMPI less
>> attractive to us, since we now have to go and get this information
>> ourselves. My thinking now is that in the future we probably won't
>> use OpenMPI for anything other than building and launching the
>> application.
> Decisions such as that, of course, are up to you. Meantime, take a
> gander at
> the data in ORTE_BPROC_NODE_SEGMENT within the registry. I tried to
> preserve
> some of what was being done, even though the method used to
> populate the
> bproc data was problematic and not really correct. You may find
> that the
> info stuck in there meets your needs for the GUI.
> My point, though, is that only bproc and hostfile would be
> supported under
> the best of current conditions, and we only get that by
> circumscribing the
> functional intent of several key frameworks. The general ability
> (across all
> systems) to obtain the node info prior to launch isn't built into
> the code
> at the moment, but is planned for ORTE 2.0 (and was built in a
> separate
> prototype branch). For reasons totally beyond my control, the
> prototype ORTE
> 2.0 code has *not* been incorporated into Open MPI yet.
> Sorry...I like that no more than you... :-/

I suppose it is our decision in the sense that we could decide not to
provide the functionality and hope that it is implemented in OpenMPI
sometime in the future. If we have to implement something ourselves
to provide this functionality, then we may as well do it in a generic
way that will work with any runtime systems.