Re: [AMBER-Developers] incompatible processor requirements in parallel tests

From: Lachele Foley <lfoley.ccrc.uga.edu>
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2010 15:46:35 -0500

Whatever finally happens.... Could the test suite write a file containing all the tests that didn't run for some reason or another? This would not contain tests that ran and failed.

I'll write some documentation once it settles. First, to the README, then more generally.

I like the AMBER_NTHREADS idea, but don't have enough experience to tell if there might be issues.

:-) Lachele

--
B. Lachele Foley, PhD '92,'02
Assistant Research Scientist
Complex Carbohydrate Research Center, UGA
706-542-0263
lfoley.ccrc.uga.edu
----- Original Message -----
From: Volodymyr Babin
[mailto:vbabin.ncsu.edu]
To: AMBER Developers Mailing List
[mailto:amber-developers.ambermd.org]
Sent: Thu, 18 Feb 2010 15:39:02
-0500
Subject: Re: [AMBER-Developers] incompatible processor requirements in
 	parallel tests
> On Thu, February 18, 2010 15:17, Jason Swails wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 3:07 PM, Volodymyr Babin <vbabin.ncsu.edu> wrote:
> >>> I checked in the new rules to Makefile.  People can feel free to
> >>> remove it if they think it's pointless.  But I agree with Lachele that
> >>> there should probably be some documentation about it (at least some
> >>> blurb in the README).
> >>
> >> The rules are very convenient indeed. Another option (less flexible,
> >> but potentially more automatic) would be to set -np inside the Makefile
> >>
> >> sh$ export DO_PARALLEL='command -np AMBER_NTHREADS'
> >
> > The problem with this is that not all MPIs use the same flag to
> > represent the number of threads.  For instance, mpiexec for many MPIs
> > uses -n instead.  -c is another common option.
> 
> But this is exactly what I was trying to illustrate: it could be
> either DO_PARALLEL='mpirun -n AMBER_NTHREADS' or
> 'mpiexec -c AMBER_NTHREADS' -- in both cases AMBER_NTHREADS would
> be substituted by the actual number later. This is not the "right"
> way (there is probably more than one anyway) -- just another possibility.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Volodymyr
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> AMBER-Developers mailing list
> AMBER-Developers.ambermd.org
> http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber-developers
> 
_______________________________________________
AMBER-Developers mailing list
AMBER-Developers.ambermd.org
http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber-developers

Received on Thu Feb 18 2010 - 13:00:03 PST