-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 212
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Update case members in case_setup #1414
Merged
Merged
Changes from 2 commits
Commits
Show all changes
5 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
de5b988
PET must halve TASKS when doubling THRDS
jgfouca 0ed54b2
Double nodes instead of halving tasks
jgfouca 975958d
Re-initialize key case values upon case.setup
jgfouca 4cb3075
Order of operations was not correct
jgfouca 56aba43
PIO settings need to happen before init_derived_attributes
jgfouca File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't understand why there was any overloading going on - the PET uses full nodes on the first test and undersubscribes on the second one. Isn't this just a matter of updating the aprun command correctly for each of (between) the two runs?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@jedwards4b if you double the threads without reducing the tasks, you'd expect to have double the total threads. On a machine that allows you to put 2 threads on a single core, this isn't a problem, but apparently aprun/titan doesn't let you do that. Keep in mind that the num_nodes has already been computed at this point in the case object, so that fact the more threads requires more nodes on titan is lost unless we update by hand like we do here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
In pet.py _case_one_setup you set NTHRDS = 2 for each component then you run case_setup to recreate the case.run and case.test scripts for the correct node and task setup
In _case_two_setup you set NTHRDS = 1 and MAX_TASKS_PER_NODE to half it's original value
and run case.setup again to recreate the case.run and case.test scripts for the same number of nodes but undersubscribed. I think that the issue that you are having is that the aprun command line is not getting updated to be consistent with these changes.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@jedwards4b , I've been thinking and you're right. The real issue is that critical values that are set up in case._initialize_derived_attributes are not updated when case_setup is called, even though the values that went in to compute those derived attributes may have changed. I'm going to test a different fix.