Hi, Mac,
Sorry for the late reply. Something urgent comes out.
We are not using session prefixing or suffixing. We have a batch system,
and all jobs share one LAM universe, and we keep the LAM environment
until the system reboots.
We are thinking about using the prefix next to avoid this problem.
Thank you for your suggestion though.
Best regards,
Lily
-----Original Message-----
From: McCalla, Mac [mailto:macmccalla_at_[hidden]]
Sent: Thursday, October 26, 2006 10:07 AM
To: General LAM/MPI mailing list
Subject: Re: LAM: Do we need to recompile LAM and applications after
weupgradethe linux kernel ?
Hi,
are you using session prefixing or suffixing to make lam
universes unique? If not,
I would suggest looking into this if there is any chance you have
applications sharing sets
of nodes.
Cheers,
Mac McCalla
Hess, Houston.
-----Original Message-----
From: lam-bounces_at_[hidden] [mailto:lam-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf
Of Lily Li
Sent: Thursday, October 26, 2006 9:29 AM
To: lam_at_[hidden]
Subject: LAM: Do we need to recompile LAM and applications after we
upgradethe linux kernel ?
Hello, everyone,
It seems that after we upgrade the linux kernel from 2.6.9-34.Elsmp to
2.6.9-42.Elsmp for our Pentium III cluster, we start having a higher
rate of lamd hanging problem on the headnode. The lamd will not response
to the command "lamnodes" after the LAM is booted and used for couple of
days.
The question is : do we need to recompile/link the LAM and the
applications after we upgrade the linux kernel ?
Regards,
Lily
PGS, Houston.
_______________________________________________
This list is archived at http://www.lam-mpi.org/MailArchives/lam/
|
