Unfortunately, it's not easy for us to support LAM/MPI 6.3 :). The
last 6.3 release was over 6 years ago and as a research organization,
we don't have the mechanisms or funding to provide that level of
support. This is one of the limitations of a release model that
involves giving support away for free. I'm not sure that LAM 6.3 had
any support at all for batch schedulers -- it's mainly designed for
an rsh/ssh environment. It might be possible to backport some of
that functionality to the 6.3 code base, but it would be a long,
difficult process. It would take me a couple hours of looking just
to figure out which functionality was in 6.3 (I honestly don't
remember - it was already in maintenance mode when I joined the lab).
I think you'll find that it's easier to update to 7.1.2 than it is to
backport the functionality you need into 6.3.
Brian
On Apr 27, 2006, at 10:32 AM, YoungHui Amend wrote:
> Some of our customers using LSF has no-login policy (no rsh/ssh).
> This is not unusual.
>
> It's not real easy for me to upgrade to 7.1.2. There's a lot of
> customization we've done to previous version to make it work for
> our application. I'm trying to get a quick solution with our
> existing LAM/MPI.
>
> Thanks,
> YoungHui
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: lam-bounces_at_[hidden] [mailto:lam-bounces_at_[hidden]] On
> Behalf Of Jeff Squyres (jsquyres)
> Sent: Thursday, April 27, 2006 9:52 AM
> To: General LAM/MPI mailing list
> Subject: Re: LAM: lamboot without rsh/ssh
>
> That is correct -- Guangyu Wu's response was technically correct
> but misleading. The TM interface is for Torque/PBS integration,
> not LSF inteegration.
>
> I think the outstanding questions are:
>
> - What about your environment is disallowing the use of ssh? (it's
> surprising that ssh would not be allowed, but not unheard of)
>
> - Can you upgrade your version of LAM? I honestly don't remember
> what job scheduler support we had for LSF way back then (years
> ago!), but I do remember that we had a bug in the LSF detection
> stuff for at least a little while (I don't remember what version(s)
> specifically). As far as I know, the LSF stuff is correct in the
> current version (7.1.2). Is there any possibility that you can
> upgrade?
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: lam-bounces_at_[hidden]
>> [mailto:lam-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Christopher Porter
>> Sent: Thursday, April 27, 2006 9:32 AM
>> To: General LAM/MPI mailing list
>> Subject: Re: LAM: lamboot without rsh/ssh
>>
>> I have looked carefully through the LAM-MPI Users guide and
>> can not find any integration notes for what must be done in
>> an LSF environment to use the "TM" interface. The
>> documentation for Torque / PBSpro states that the batch
>> queueing system is automatically detected and the TM
>> interface is used.
>>
>> So I have "tested" the integration with LSF by doing nothing
>> special and trying to run a job. Nothing seemed to detect
>> the LSF environment, the job failed saying that it could not
>> contact the LAM daemons (because none were booted). So I
>> believe this is an incorrect statement and the "TM" interface
>> is not integrated with LSF.
>>
>> Someone prove me wrong? Please?
>>
>> chris
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: lam-bounces_at_[hidden]
>> [mailto:lam-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Guangyu Wu
>> Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2006 5:56 PM
>> To: 'General LAM/MPI mailing list'
>> Subject: ç”å¤: LAM: lamboot without rsh/ssh
>>
>> There is a TM interface integrated in WMS such as PBS Pro
>> which could boot lam without rsh/ssh. I believe LSF also has
>> such an integration with Lam.
>> HTH
>>
>> -----邮件原件-----
>> å‘件人: lam-bounces_at_[hidden] [mailto:lam-bounces_at_[hidden]]
>> 代表 Phil Ehrens
>> å‘é€æ—¶é—´: 2006å¹´4月25æ—¥ 3:44
>> 收件人: General LAM/MPI mailing list
>> 主题: Re: LAM: lamboot without rsh/ssh
>>
>> YoungHui Amend wrote:
>>> I'm using an old versions (6.3) of LAM/MPI. In this
>> version of LAM,
>>> lamboot uses rsh to run hboot which forks lam demon (lamd). The
>>> problem we are running in to is that rsh is not allowed
>> (for security
>>> reasons) on the cluster of machines connected to LSF. Ssh
>> also causes
>>> problems because it prompts you for the password. I know there's a
>>> way to setup ssh so it doesn't prompt for a password, but
>> it is not a viable option.
>>> So, is there a way to fork lam demon without going through lamboot?
>>
>> You have an installation where rsh can't be used due to
>> security concerns... and ssh can't be used because it's "not viable"?
>>
>> Do they make you communicate with you coworkers by blinking
>> flashlights at them?
>> _______________________________________________
>> This list is archived at http://www.lam-mpi.org/MailArchives/lam/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> This list is archived at http://www.lam-mpi.org/MailArchives/lam/
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> This list is archived at http://www.lam-mpi.org/MailArchives/lam/
|
