[mpich-discuss] process failing...
Ron Palmer
ron.palmer at pgcgroup.com.au
Sun May 25 20:18:51 CDT 2014
Antonio and Pavan,
thanks for your comments and suggestions, I have passed them on to the
group that writes this program. I believe he had assumed that all
processes execute at the same speed.
I will write a comment once this is under control.
Thanks,
Ron
On 25/05/2014 10:50, Balaji, Pavan wrote:
> Actually, the below example will not cause any unexpected messages since you are doing an ANY_SOURCE receive. To get unexpected messages you need to be making progress on the receive side, but the incoming messages should be messages you don’t have a receive buffer for. Here’s a modified example:
>
> Host A:
> for(int i=0; i<n; i++) {
> MPI_Isend(..to C..);
> MPI_Send(..to B..);
> }
>
> Host B:
> for(int i=0; i<n; i++) {
> MPI_Recv(..from A..);
> MPI_Isend(..to C..);
> }
>
> Host C:
> for(int i=0; i<n; i++) {
> MPI_Recv(..from B..);
> }
> for(int i=0; i<n; i++) {
> MPI_Recv(..from A..);
> }
>
> — Pavan
>
> On May 24, 2014, at 7:19 PM, Antonio J. Peña <apenya at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
>
>> Hi Ron,
>>
>> Depending on how the algorithm is structured, I may well be that the faster computers are generating messages faster than the slow computer is able to process them. As the problem size increases, the amount of data in unprocessed messages may get too high for that computer. In a very simple example (but note that there are many other possible situations):
>>
>> Hosts A and B:
>> for(int i=0; i<n; i++) {
>> MPI_Send(buf, count, MPI_INT, host_c, 0, MPI_COMM_WORLD);
>> buf += count;
>> }
>>
>> Host C:
>> for(int i=0; i<2*n; i++) {
>> MPI_Recv(buf, count, MPI_INT, MPI_ANY_SOURCE, 0, MPI_COMM_WORLD, &status);
>> process_data(buf);
>> }
>>
>> In that case the senders keep sending data to host_c faster than it's calling MPI_Recv, and get received by MPICH as unexpected messages (MPICH doesn't know where to place that data, and uses temporary internal buffers). Note that this situation is not necessarily caused by different processing speeds, since the culprit may well be the used algorithm itself. A very simple solution to avoid the prior potential problem could be:
>>
>> Host A and B:
>> MPI_Barrier(MPI_COMM_WORLD);
>> for(int i=0; i<n; i++) {
>> MPI_Send(buf, count, MPI_INT, host_c, 0, MPI_COMM_WORLD);
>> buf += n;
>> }
>>
>> Host C:
>> for(int i=0; i<2*n; i++) {
>> MPI_Irecv(buf, count, MPI_INT, MPI_ANY_SOURCE, 0, MPI_COMM_WORLD, &requests[i]);
>> buf += count;
>> }
>> MPI_Barrier(MPI_COMM_WORLD);
>> for(int i=0; i<2*n; i++) {
>> MPI_Waitany(2*n, requests, &idx, &status);
>> process_data(buf+idx*count);
>> }
>>
>> Now the data is placed on its final destination, since it's guaranteed that the MPI implementation knows its destination before receiving it. That solution would assume that there is enough memory for preallocating all receiving buffers, which may not be true and may require, for example, implementing a high-level protocol (such as based on credits) to synchronize the sends and receives to make sure that there is room on the receiver for them.
>>
>> I hope this helps.
>>
>> Best,
>> Antonio
>>
>>
>> On 05/24/2014 02:00 AM, Ron Palmer wrote:
>>> Antonio, Rajeev and others,
>>> thanks for your replies and comments on possible causes for the error messages and failure, I have passed them on to the programmers of the underlying application. I must admit I do not understand what unexpected messages are (I am but a mere user), could you perhaps give examples of typical causes of them? Eg, the cluster it runs on consists of 3 dual xeon computers with varying cpu clock rating - could these error messages be due to getting out of synch, expecting results but not getting them from the slower computer? I have re-started the process but excluded the slowest computer (2.27GHz, the other two are running at 2.87 and 3.2) as I was running out of ideas.
>>>
>>> For your information, this runs well on smaller problems (few computations).
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Ron
>>>
>>> On 24/05/2014 3:10 AM, Rajeev Thakur wrote:
>>>> Yes. The message below says some process has received 261,895 messages for which no matching receives have been posted yet.
>>>>
>>>> <Mail Attachment>
>>>>
>>>> Rajeev
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> It looks like at least one of your processes is receiving too many unexpected messages, leading to get out of memory. Unexpected messages are those not matching a posted receive on the receiver side. You may check with the application developers to make them review the algorithm or look for any possible bug.
>>>>>
>>>>> Antonio
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> discuss mailing list
>>>> discuss at mpich.org
>>>>
>>>> To manage subscription options or unsubscribe:
>>>>
>>>> https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> discuss mailing list
>>> discuss at mpich.org
>>>
>>> To manage subscription options or unsubscribe:
>>>
>>> https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>>
>> --
>> Antonio J. Peña
>> Postdoctoral Appointee
>> Mathematics and Computer Science Division
>> Argonne National Laboratory
>> 9700 South Cass Avenue, Bldg. 240, Of. 3148
>> Argonne, IL 60439-4847
>>
>> apenya at mcs.anl.gov
>> www.mcs.anl.gov/~apenya
>> _______________________________________________
>> discuss mailing list discuss at mpich.org
>> To manage subscription options or unsubscribe:
>> https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list discuss at mpich.org
> To manage subscription options or unsubscribe:
> https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
--
*Ron Palmer*MSc MBA.
Principal Geophysicist
ron.palmer at pgcgroup.com.au <mailto:ron.palmer at pgcgroup.com.au>
0413 579 099
07 3103 4963
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mpich.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20140526/8966e3bb/attachment.html>
More information about the discuss
mailing list