Hello Dave, Thanks for your reply. We followed your advice and installed Hydra on each node. We specify ip address in hosts file. For example: shell $ mpiexec –f hosts –np 2 ./app shell $ cat hosts 192.168.0.1 192.168.1.1 (The two node IP belongs to 2 different subnets: for example, subnet #1 192.168.0.0/24 and subnet #2: 192.168.1.0/24) The error out put is “ssh connect to host 192.168.1.1 port 22: connection time out”. So is there a option for Hydra to solve this problem? Thank you! Sincerely, Na Zhang On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 5:20 PM, <[email protected]> wrote:
Send discuss mailing list submissions to [email protected]
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to [email protected]
You can reach the person managing the list at [email protected]
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of discuss digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: [PATCH] Use attribute layout_compatible for pair types (Jed Brown) 2. Re: [PATCH] Use attribute layout_compatible for pair types (Dmitri Gribenko) 3. start MPD daemons on 2 different subnets (Na Zhang) 4. Re: start MPD daemons on 2 different subnets (Dave Goodell) 5. Fatal error in PMPI_Reduce (Michael Colonno) 6. Re: Fatal error in PMPI_Reduce (Pavan Balaji) 7. Re: Fatal error in PMPI_Reduce (Pavan Balaji)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1 Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 14:00:50 -0600 From: Jed Brown <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [mpich-discuss] [PATCH] Use attribute layout_compatible for pair types Message-ID: < CAM9tzSnqJHaj6wbKBdAWp5YveG+UW_OWiA768GRb1spHjn+TZw@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
On Jan 9, 2013 12:56 PM, "Dmitri Gribenko" <[email protected]> wrote:
On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 8:19 PM, Dave Goodell <[email protected]> wrote:
Both implemented and pushed as d440abb and ac15f7a. Thanks.
-Dave
On Jan 1, 2013, at 11:14 PM CST, Jed Brown wrote:
In addition, I suggest guarding these definitions. Leaving these in increases the total number of symbols in an example executable linking PETSc by a factor of 2. (They're all read-only, but they're still there.) Clang is smart enough to remove these, presumably because it understands the special attributes.
No, LLVM removes these not because of the attributes, but because these are unused. And when they are used, most of the time they don't have their address taken, so their value is propagated to the point where they are read and the constants again become unused.
I don't think GCC isn't smart enough to do the same. Do you compile with optimization?
Dmitri, as discussed in the other thread, it's smart enough, but only when optimization is turned on. There's no reason to needlessly make debug builds heavier than necessary. This is not a big deal either way.