[Bug 171993] Review Request: mpich2 - An implementation of MPI

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: mpich2 -  An implementation of MPI


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=171993





------- Additional Comments From dledford at redhat.com  2008-04-16 16:08 EST -------
I should note that I've made significant changes to lam/openmpi that aren't
reflected in Fedora yet.  The most important of which is dumping the
alternatives usage entirely.  It has proven to be unwieldy at best, a nightmare
at worst.  Instead, my current packages use mpi-selector.  You can find
mpi-selector, openmpi, and lam packages for the upcoming rhel5.2 release that
demonstrate what I'm talking about (and intending to bring into fedora after f9
is released) at my Infiniband package page:

http://people.redhat.com/dledford/Infiniband/rhel5.2

Also of note is that, in line with the comments in comment #7 and comment #8, my
current packages use %{_libdir}/%{name} as the prefix for all files in the lam
package, and %{_libdir}/%{name}/%{version}-%{opt_cc} as the prefix for all files
in openmpi (the difference being because I've never been given any requests to
have more than one version or compiler of lam installed at a time, but I have
been given requests to have multiple versions and multipler compilers of openmpi
at the same time).

Another item of note is that I have outstanding requests to also include
mvapich/mvapich2 in the distro for use over infiniband.  I've not gotten any
requests for mpich, but then I'm not fully aware of the relationship between
mpich and mvapich.  However, that does raise the question in my mind of
redundancy (I'm not talking about redundant MPI implementations...we're already
at the stage of ludicrous there, I'm wondering is mvapich a later version of
mpich, are they the same code base, or is the naming similarity coincidence). 
If these packages are redundant, then would it not be better to use mvapich
(which I think supports more of the high speed interconnects natively, but I
could be wrong)?  If they aren't, then ignore that issue.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.