PBS and PGI interactions?
morton at cs.umt.edu
Sat Apr 7 20:34:02 EDT 2001
Please note that I'm posting this the xtreme
group, the beowulf group, and the Portland Group
We recently received an 18-CPU Xtreme machine from Paralogic.
PBS didn't work but, fortunately, I had a "little" experience
installing it once before, and have finally succeeded in getting
it to work PROPERLY for running MPICH jobs on the cluster.
I would like it to run PROPERLY for HPF jobs (and OpenMP jobs)
using the PGI suite and, had just "assumed" that since both
PGI and Paralogic package these things together, that somebody,
somewhere had done this work before. However, any searches I've
tried have ended up fruitless. I see a few instances of people
using PGI's mpirun with PBS, but that doesn't cover the HPF, etc.
Has anybody at Paralogic or PGI actually integrated PBS and
PGI runtime environments so that PBS is utilised to run HPF
and OpenMP jobs? I haven't seen any evidence of this, and
would sure appreciate some pointers in the right direction.
Some specific questions:
1) Has anybody devised an approach (I would guess a wrapper) that
allows parallel jobs to be run only via PBS? In other words,
in my opinion, you can't have a production cluster if any old
Joe Sixpack can come in and bypass PBS by typing
mpirun -np 16 a.out
2) Has anybody devised an approach for launching PGI HPF (and OpenMP)
jobs via PBS, that does so correctly (i.e. keeps track of node
allocations from other jobs, etc.)?
3) With PGI's HPF runtime environment, is it possible to execute
completely on "compute nodes?" I'm trying to reserve our "head"
node for compilation, visualisation, etc., but it appears to me that
when you run PGI HPF processes, they always put one on the "local" node,
which isn't necessarily a good thing. I don't see a "clear" way around
My "first" impression of PBS inclusion in systems like Paralogic's, and
in PGI's CDK, is that perhaps PBS isn't a fully-integrated application.
I hope I'm wrong, and I'd sure appreciate it if someone pointed me in
the right direction!
I seem to come from an older school where we used NQS on Cray T3E's
to run ANY parallel job, whether it was written in PVM, MPICH, EPCC
MPI, PGI HPF, etc. In fact, Cray's "mpprun" command seemed to
abstract away the details of dealing with various parallel libraries.
You launched a job from a shell node - you could run an interactive job
for maybe 30 minutes, and the allocation of those nodes would be
coordinated with NQS. Anything longer required a batch NQS job
and, again, you could use the same submission paradigm whether you
were using PGI HPF, MPICH, etc.
Has anybody worked on this in the realm of clusters? My guess is that
most of these issues can be resolved through high-level scripts, but
I know it ain't easy. If someone has explored this, I'd love
to hear about it. If not, I'll put a student or two to work on it.
In my opinion, you just can't make clusters accessible to the general
scientific public without such mechanisms. :)
Don Morton http://www.cs.umt.edu/~morton/
Department of Computer Science The University of Montana
Missoula, MT 59812 | Voice (406) 243-4975 | Fax (406) 243-5139
Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf at beowulf.org
To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf
More information about the Beowulf