Thanks everybody,
Of course, if I had more time, I could go through the sequential version
of my code to free the memory but...
Thomas
Prabhanjan Kambadur wrote:
>Hi,
>
>Sorry, but the kind of memory management that you are talking about is not
>existant in lam :-). We clean up all the memory which we allocate
>internally in our libraries. But we are not responsible for the memory
>that was allocated by the user :-). Segfault behaviour is completely
>dependant on the OS (which in most cases frees up the memory). We do not
>do anything special in those cases. LAM daemons keep running when the
>process goes away.
>
>Hope this helps,
>
>Anju.
>
>
>
>>Hi all!
>>I am in charge of a scientific code which runs on about ten
>>work-stations using lam-mpi. The os on all nodes is a Linux RedHat9
>>(2.4.xxx). LAM/MPI is 7.0.2
>>This code has *enormous* memory leaks (but I didn't write them!!!):
>>nothing (or very little) have been done to clear the mallocated slots
>>and Valgrind yelllllls each time it is run on this program.
>>Are the LAM deamons capable of dealing with memory leaks on remote hosts
>>: are they in charge of giving back the memory they got for running
>>their process to the remote os (Linux in my case)? If yes, it seems to
>>me that each time a lam process finishes, the os will wipe out the used
>>memory and make it available again. Or perhaps is it when I lamhalt from
>>my master node? What happens to my deamons anyway when my program
>>segfault on a remote host. Does LAM handles this too?
>>
>>Thanks for your answers. If there is already a faq or doc I can read to
>>get these answers, do not hesitate to tell it, will you?
>>Thomas
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>This list is archived at http://www.lam-mpi.org/MailArchives/lam/
>>
>>
>>
>_______________________________________________
>This list is archived at http://www.lam-mpi.org/MailArchives/lam/
>
>
>
|
