Menu
▾
▴
Re: [Repast-interest] Extending Patch class in Repast HPC
|
From: Murphy, J. T. <jtm...@an...> - 2011-07-27 15:28:40
|
Kashif,
Thanks for this; I can't tell from this what the problem is, except that
it does look like selectedPatch is null. I think your idea is right and
the issue is not with the code in InitializeTarget but rather with the
code that is calling it.
Keep tracking it further upstream; let me know if you make more headway or
have more questions.
Best,
John
--
John T. Murphy
Computational Postdoctoral Fellow
Decision and Information Sciences and
Argonne Leadership Computing Facility
Argonne National Laboratory
jtm...@an...
On 7/27/11 8:57 AM, "Kashif Zia" <ka...@pe...> wrote:
>John,
>
>The error is generated at:
>device->settargetPID(selectedPatch->getId()); or
>d->settargetPID(selectedPatch->getId());
>
>if I comment this statement, the setup at all processes complete
>successfully. If I enable it, the set up at one processor is complete, and
>following stack is generated:
>
>>
>>simple_following_model_single.exe!InitializeTarget::operator()(AmI *
>device=0x025a4880) Line 30 + 0x3 bytes C++
>
>simple_following_model_single.exe!repast::relogo::AgentSet<AmI>::apply<Ini
>ti
>alizeTarget>(const InitializeTarget & func={...}) Line 412 + 0x13 bytes
>C++
>
>simple_following_model_single.exe!FollowingObserver::initializeAmIDir()
>Line 42 + 0x34 bytes C++
>
>simple_following_model_single.exe!FollowingObserver::setup(repast::Propert
>ie
>s props={...}) Line 99 C++
>
>simple_following_model_single.exe!repast::relogo::SimulationRunner::run<Fo
>ll
>owingObserver,patchExt>(repast::Properties & props={...}) Line 117
>C++
>
>simple_following_model_single.exe!runFollowing(std::basic_string<char,std:
>:c
>har_traits<char>,std::allocator<char> > propsFile="zombie.props") Line 35
>C++
> simple_following_model_single.exe!main(int argc=3, char * *
>argv=0x009961a0) Line 55 + 0x1f bytes C++
> simple_following_model_single.exe!__tmainCRTStartup() Line 555 +
>0x19 bytes C
> simple_following_model_single.exe!mainCRTStartup() Line 371 C
> kernel32.dll!7c817077()
> [Frames below may be incorrect and/or missing, no symbols loaded
>for
>kernel32.dll]
>
>simple_following_model_single.exe!boost::archive::detail::basic_iarchive_i
>mp
>l::register_type(const boost::archive::detail::basic_iserializer &
>bis={...}) Line 297 C++
> fc45c6ff()
>
>Probably it is due to the reason that the current process proceed further
>and require a patch which is not available.
>
>
>Best,
>
>kashif
>
>
>
>
>---
>Kashif Zia
>
>PhD Candidate
>Institut für Pervasive Computing, Johannes Kepler Universität Linz,
>Altenberger Straße 69, A-4040 Linz
>Room: P105, Phone: +43-732-2468-9673, Fax: +43-732-2468-8426
>E-Mail: ka...@pe...
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Murphy, John T. [mailto:jtm...@an...]
>Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2011 2:20 PM
>To: rep...@li...
>Subject: Re: [Repast-interest] Extending Patch class in Repast HPC
>
>Kashif,
>
>I'm glad your code is compiling.
>
>Just by looking, I can't find an error in the code you've posted. I am
>having trouble figuring out exactly what are the problems that you are
>having. It looks like what you want to happen is:
>
>-------------------------------------------
>I) All patches are initially marked '-1' for the isTunnel variable
>
>II) You then mark some of them with a '1' flag (code not shown)
>
>III) The code you have sent is invoked for each agent of type 'AmI'; it:
>
> A) Retrieves the set of all patches (which should include some that are
>'-1' and a few that have been marked '1') called 'allPatches'
>
> B) Uses 'withMax' to retrieve just the ones with isTunnel = 1, and place
>them into 'somePatches'
>
> C) Selects one of the patches from 'somePatches' using 'minOneOf'
>
> D) Sets a pointer in the AmI agent to point to this patch
>
>
>You say that there is a problem with 'B'; it actually returns a set with
>patches that have isTunnel = -1. It seems likely that the problem is that
>none of the patches that are retrieved by the 'A' actually has a value of
>'1'. The first thing to check is whether any of the patches in
>'allPatches' has a value of 1. I would just iterate through and print out
>all their values as a first test. If the answer is no, and all of the
>patches in 'allPatches' have a value of -1, then the next question is
>whether the code where you try to set some of the values to '1' is working
>correctly and is being called prior to this code. You might also check
>whether the size of 'allPatches' is what you expect: it should be the
>equal to the number of patches being managed by that process, but if it
>excludes some patches (like the ones with -1), then that's a different
>issue.
>
>You also say that there is a problem with 'C'; you actually say that there
>is an error here. Is this a run-time error that causes the program to
>crash? If so, what is the output? Please include the entire text of the
>error output.
>
>You say "The error was generated at line: patchExt* selectedPatch =
>somePatches.minOneOf(DistanceToPatch());, because somePatches never had
>any patches." I don't know how to interpret this. If 'allPatches' had
>patches in it (after step 'A'), then there should be patches in
>'somePatches' in step B. Are you saying that 'somePatches' is empty (size
>= 0) after step B? Even then, if somePatches is empty, step 'C' should not
>cause an error; the error should be thrown at step D, I think.
>
>As to your other question, the use of (0, false) in the implicit
>construction of the AgentPackage (in the Zombies model) is fine- the
>values are immediately overwritten if the agent is 'human' and ignored if
>it is a 'zombie'. Possibly the 0 and false could be omitted, but it's good
>form to include them.
>
>Best,
>John
>
>
>--
>John T. Murphy
>Computational Postdoctoral Fellow
>Decision and Information Sciences and
>Argonne Leadership Computing Facility
>Argonne National Laboratory
>jtm...@an...
>
>
>
>
>On 7/27/11 6:01 AM, "Kashif Zia" <ka...@pe...> wrote:
>
>>Hello John and everyone
>>
>>There is one good and one bad news. Good one is that I have finally
>>compiled
>>and run the program (my program). Bad is that it is not doing what I
>>intended.
>>
>>Actually the error was generated at the point when I wanted initialize
>>the
>>target patch in the setup. The intention was to save the patch (AgentId)
>>in
>>each of the agent type AmI; i.e. a patch with variable isTunnel set to 1
>>(instead of default -1) and nearest to agent. The code of class
>>responsible
>>for that is:
>>
>>#include "InitializeTarget.h"
>>
>>#include "patchExt.h"
>>AmI* d;
>>struct DistanceToPatch {
>> double operator()(const patchExt* patch) const {
>> double dist;
>> dist = d->distancexy(patch->xCor(), patch->yCor());
>> return dist;
>> }
>>};
>>
>>int valGetter_is_Tunnel(patchExt* myPatch){ return myPatch->isTunnel();}
>>
>>void InitializeTarget::operator()(AmI* device) const {
>> d = device;
>> AgentSet<patchExt> allPatches = obs->patches<patchExt>();
>> AgentSet<patchExt> somePatches;
>>
>> allPatches.withMax(&valGetter_is_Tunnel, somePatches);
>> patchExt* selectedPatch =
>>somePatches.minOneOf(DistanceToPatch());
>>
>> device->settargetPID(selectedPatch->getId());
>>}
>>
>>The error was generated at line: patchExt* selectedPatch =
>>somePatches.minOneOf(DistanceToPatch());, because somePatches never had
>>any
>>patches. allPatches has all patches with isTunnel = -1 (which should not
>>have happen as well. Before I had set few patches where isTunnel = 1).
>>After
>>removing the culprit and just picking one of the patch, it worked:
>>
>>#include "InitializeTarget.h"
>>
>>#include "patchExt.h"
>>AmI* d;
>>struct DistanceToPatch {
>> double operator()(const patchExt* patch) const {
>> double dist;
>> dist = d->distancexy(patch->xCor(), patch->yCor());
>> return dist;
>> }
>>};
>>
>>int valGetter_is_Tunnel(patchExt* myPatch){ return myPatch->isTunnel();}
>>
>>void InitializeTarget::operator()(AmI* device) const {
>> d = device;
>> AgentSet<patchExt> allPatches = obs->patches<patchExt>();
>> AgentSet<patchExt> somePatches;
>>
>> //allPatches.withMax(&valGetter_is_Tunnel, somePatches);
>> //patchExt* selectedPatch =
>>somePatches.minOneOf(DistanceToPatch());
>> patchExt* selectedPatch = allPatches.oneOf();
>>
>> device->settargetPID(selectedPatch->getId());
>>}
>>
>>However this is not the behavior I need.
>>
>>
>>
>>One more question: why in
>>
>> void provideContent(const repast::AgentRequest& request,
>>std::vector<AgentPackage>& out);
>> void provideContent(repast::relogo::RelogoAgent* agent,
>>std::vector<AgentPackage>& out);
>>
>>the constructors are initialized with default values (0, false).
>>
>>AgentPackage content = { id.id(), id.startingRank(), id.agentType(), 0,
>>false };
>>
>>Is it technically correct.
>>
>>
>>
>>Your feedback would be valuable.
>>
>>With Best Regards.
>>
>>
>>
>>---
>>Kashif Zia
>>
>>PhD Candidate
>>Institut für Pervasive Computing, Johannes Kepler Universität Linz,
>>Altenberger Straße 69, A-4040 Linz
>>Room: P105, Phone: +43-732-2468-9673, Fax: +43-732-2468-8426
>>E-Mail: ka...@pe...
>>
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Murphy, John T. [mailto:jtm...@an...]
>>Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2011 4:03 PM
>>To: rep...@li...
>>Subject: Re: [Repast-interest] Extending Patch class in Repast HPC
>>
>>Yes, this does look like a different error than before; it isn't giving
>>very
>>much information about what is happening, either.
>>
>>But (per my earlier e-mail) notice that you are invoking by:
>>
>>mpiexec zombie_model.exe config.props zombie.props
>>
>>but the proc.per.x and proc.per.y values in the properties file are 2 x
>>2,
>>which means you need exactly 4 processes. Try:
>>
>>mpiexec /np 4 zombie_model.exe config.props zombie.props
>>
>>It is possible that this is the problem; try it and see what happens.
>>
>>Best,
>>John
>>
>>--
>>John T. Murphy
>>Computational Postdoctoral Fellow
>>Decision and Information Sciences and
>>Argonne Leadership Computing Facility
>>Argonne National Laboratory
>>jtm...@an...
>>
>>From: Kashif Zia
>><ka...@pe...<mailto:ka...@pe...>>
>>Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2011 08:51:18 -0500
>>To: "Murphy, John T." <jtm...@an...<mailto:jtm...@an...>>,
>>"rep...@li...<mailto:rep...@li...
>>e
>>fo
>>rge.net>"
>><rep...@li...<mailto:rep...@li...
>>e
>>fo
>>rge.net>>
>>Subject: RE: [Repast-interest] Extending Patch class in Repast HPC
>>
>>
>>Zombie_model: So now the program is just crashing not even completing the
>>setup:
>>
>>'zombie_model.exe': Loaded 'C:\Dokumente und Einstellungen\kashif\Eigene
>>Dateien\Visual Studio
>>2010\Projects\RepastHPC_Solution\RepastHPC\Debug\zombie_model.exe',
>>Symbols
>>loaded.
>>
>>'zombie_model.exe': Loaded 'C:\WINDOWS\system32\ntdll.dll'
>>
>>'zombie_model.exe': Loaded 'C:\WINDOWS\system32\kernel32.dll'
>>
>>'zombie_model.exe': Loaded 'C:\WINDOWS\system32\msmpi.dll'
>>
>>'zombie_model.exe': Loaded
>>'C:\WINDOWS\WinSxS\x86_Microsoft.VC80.CRT_1fc8b3b9a1e18e3b_8.0.50727.6195
>>_
>>x-
>>ww_44262b86\msvcr80.dll'
>>
>>'zombie_model.exe': Loaded 'C:\WINDOWS\system32\msvcrt.dll'
>>
>>'zombie_model.exe': Loaded 'C:\WINDOWS\system32\advapi32.dll'
>>
>>'zombie_model.exe': Loaded 'C:\WINDOWS\system32\rpcrt4.dll'
>>
>>'zombie_model.exe': Loaded 'C:\WINDOWS\system32\secur32.dll'
>>
>>'zombie_model.exe': Loaded 'C:\WINDOWS\system32\mswsock.dll'
>>
>>'zombie_model.exe': Loaded 'C:\WINDOWS\system32\ws2_32.dll'
>>
>>'zombie_model.exe': Loaded 'C:\WINDOWS\system32\ws2help.dll'
>>
>>'zombie_model.exe': Loaded 'C:\WINDOWS\system32\msvcp100d.dll', Symbols
>>loaded.
>>
>>'zombie_model.exe': Loaded 'C:\WINDOWS\system32\msvcr100d.dll', Symbols
>>loaded.
>>
>>'zombie_model.exe': Loaded 'C:\WINDOWS\system32\dnsapi.dll'
>>
>>'zombie_model.exe': Loaded 'C:\WINDOWS\system32\iphlpapi.dll'
>>
>>'zombie_model.exe': Loaded 'C:\WINDOWS\system32\user32.dll'
>>
>>'zombie_model.exe': Loaded 'C:\WINDOWS\system32\gdi32.dll'
>>
>>'zombie_model.exe': Loaded 'C:\WINDOWS\system32\imm32.dll'
>>
>>'zombie_model.exe': Loaded 'C:\WINDOWS\system32\lpk.dll'
>>
>>'zombie_model.exe': Loaded 'C:\WINDOWS\system32\usp10.dll'
>>
>>'zombie_model.exe': Loaded 'C:\WINDOWS\system32\winrnr.dll'
>>
>>'zombie_model.exe': Loaded 'C:\WINDOWS\system32\wldap32.dll'
>>
>>'zombie_model.exe': Loaded 'C:\Programme\Bonjour\mdnsNSP.dll'
>>
>>'zombie_model.exe': Loaded 'C:\WINDOWS\system32\hnetcfg.dll'
>>
>>'zombie_model.exe': Loaded 'C:\WINDOWS\system32\wshtcpip.dll'
>>
>>'zombie_model.exe': Loaded 'C:\WINDOWS\system32\msv1_0.dll'
>>
>>'zombie_model.exe': Loaded 'C:\WINDOWS\system32\cryptdll.dll'
>>
>>'zombie_model.exe': Loaded 'C:\WINDOWS\system32\rasadhlp.dll'
>>
>>'zombie_model.exe': Loaded 'C:\WINDOWS\system32\apphelp.dll'
>>
>>Unhandled exception at 0x005a9736 in zombie_model.exe: 0xC0000005: Access
>>violation reading location 0x00000000.
>>
>>The command used is:
>>
>>mpiexec zombie_model.exe config.props zombie.props
>>
>>And the props files are:
>>
>>Zombie.props:
>>
>>#random.seed = 1284067381
>>
>>stop.at = 100
>>
>># per process
>>
>>human.count = 500;
>>
>>zombie.count = 5;
>>
>># world definition props
>>
>>min.x = -100
>>
>>min.y = -100
>>
>>max.x = 101
>>
>>max.y = 101
>>
>>grid.buffer = 2
>>
>># these must multiply to total number of processes
>>
>>proc.per.x = 2
>>
>>proc.per.y = 2
>>
>># named random number distributions
>>
>>distribution.zombie_move = int_uniform, 0, 2
>>
>>config.props:
>>
>># DEBUG, INFO, WARN, ERROR
>>
>>logger.root = INFO, R, stdout
>>
>>logger.repast.system = DEBUG, R, stdout
>>
>>
>>
>>appender.R = RollingFileAppender
>>
>>appender.R.MaxBackupIndex = 1
>>
>>appender.R.File = ./logs/repast.log
>>
>>appender.R.MaxFileSize=200
>>
>>
>>Best,
>>
>>Kashif
>>
>>---
>>
>>Kashif Zia
>>
>>PhD Candidate
>>
>>Institut für Pervasive Computing, Johannes Kepler Universität Linz,
>>Altenberger Straße 69, A-4040 Linz
>>
>>Room: P105, Phone: +43-732-2468-9673, Fax: +43-732-2468-8426
>>
>>E-Mail: ka...@pe...<mailto:ka...@pe...>
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Murphy, John T. [mailto:jtm...@an...]
>>Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2011 3:39 PM
>>To:
>>rep...@li...<mailto:rep...@li...
>>f
>>or
>>ge.net>
>>Subject: Re: [Repast-interest] Extending Patch class in Repast HPC
>>
>>Kashif,
>>
>>Thanks for this; this makes some things a lot clearer.
>>
>>You are correct about Rumor Model; the graph network is initialized
>>
>>explicitly at startup and managed by RepastHPC through the course of the
>>
>>running simulation.
>>
>>You are also correct that there is no 'explicit' assignment of cells to a
>>
>>particular processor. ReLogo does this automatically and implicitly. It
>>
>>begins with the properties file: min.x, min.y, max.x, and max.y
>>
>>properties. These are the properties for the entire world that is being
>>
>>defined: the maximum and minimum extents of the x and y directions are
>>
>>given. Then it looks at the proc.per.x and proc.per.y properties. It uses
>>
>>these to create a grid that divides up the whole landscape into a
>>
>>cartesian grid. So, if:
>>
>>min.x = -100
>>
>>min.y = -100
>>
>>max.x = 101
>>
>>max.y = 101
>>
>>proc.per.x = 10
>>
>>proc.per.y = 5
>>
>>Then the space is 200 x 200, and it is divided up into a 10 x 5 Cartesian
>>
>>grid, with each of the 50 elements on this grid going on a different
>>
>>processor. This is why if proc.per.x = X and proc.per.y = Y, then the
>>
>>number of processors must be = X x Y (that is, x and y multiplied)- in
>>
>>this case /np 50. (Note: Usually the number of processes is a power of
>>
>>two. Also, I'll check on why '101' is used and not '100'... I'm following
>>
>>the model in the zombies property file here...)
>>
>>This means that a given cell (say, x = -25, y = 37) is on a specific
>>
>>processor depending on where it is on the processor Cartesian grid;
>>
>>RepastHPC handles this automatically. When agents move around on the grid
>>
>>they will move from processor to processor- also handled automatically.
>>
>>Generally your program should _not_ try to determine which process is
>>
>>controlling a given patch; the code should be written to manage whatever
>>
>>agents or patches are present, and otherwise rely on RepastHPC to manage
>>
>>what is going on under the hood.
>>
>>I am not sure whether indexing or iterating through an agent set is
>>
>>faster; under the hood an agent set is a vector, and iterators are more
>>
>>customarily used, but in terms of absolute performance, I don't know if
>>
>>there is an argument for one over the other. My hunch is that the
>>iterator
>>
>>is slightly faster, but I haven't checked. A 'const' iterator may be able
>>
>>to be optimized by the compiler in ways that a normal one can't, and this
>>
>>can help.
>>
>>Best,
>>
>>John
>>
>>--
>>
>>John T. Murphy
>>
>>Computational Postdoctoral Fellow
>>
>>Decision and Information Sciences and
>>
>>Argonne Leadership Computing Facility
>>
>>Argonne National Laboratory
>>
>>jtm...@an...<mailto:jtm...@an...>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>On 7/26/11 8:09 AM, "Kashif Zia"
>><ka...@pe...<mailto:ka...@pe...>> wrote:
>>
>>>John,
>>
>>>
>>
>>>What I mean by precompiled is the exe file in "example_bin" of the
>>
>>>distribution. And the other one is my compilation with VS. It means that
>>
>>>if
>>
>>>those programs were running then there must be something wrong with
>>>system
>>
>>>specifications of mine. Most probably that is related with number of
>>
>>>processors available. However this is only valid for zombie not for
>>
>>>rumor.
>>
>>>
>>
>>>I am trying to get into rumor model now. Need some time. But what I have
>>
>>>seen there is that "probably" the graph network is explicitly
>>>distributed
>>
>>>between the processors and managed later on. Zombie is grid based and I
>>
>>>have
>>
>>>seen no explicit assignment of cells to a particular processor.
>>
>>>
>>
>>>Shortly I will send you the traces of the zombie model.
>>
>>>
>>
>>>Agentset iteration problem is solved. One question though: I have used
>>
>>>index
>>
>>>(someTurtles [i]) to get all agents in a for loop. I think it is
>>>working.
>>
>>>Is
>>
>>>there any performance issue comparing it with iterator mechanism?
>>
>>>
>>
>>>Best Regards.
>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>
>>>---
>>
>>>Kashif Zia
>>
>>>
>>
>>>PhD Candidate
>>
>>>Institut für Pervasive Computing, Johannes Kepler Universität Linz,
>>
>>>Altenberger Straße 69, A-4040 Linz
>>
>>>Room: P105, Phone: +43-732-2468-9673, Fax: +43-732-2468-8426
>>
>>>E-Mail: ka...@pe...<mailto:ka...@pe...>
>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>
>>>From: Murphy, John T. [mailto:jtm...@an...]
>>
>>>Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2011 2:48 PM
>>
>>>To:
>>rep...@li...<mailto:rep...@li...
>>f
>>or
>>ge.net>
>>
>>>Subject: Re: [Repast-interest] Extending Patch class in Repast HPC
>>
>>>
>>
>>>Kashif,
>>
>>>
>>
>>>At this point we have tried a number of variations and revisions, and
>>>it's
>>
>>>no longer clear to me which error goes with which problem (or even with
>>
>>>which model- the Zombies model or your new model) and under what
>>
>>>conditions each error occurs. I've lost track. The error that you are
>>
>>>getting for your 'simple_following_model' occurs during setup, but the
>>
>>>error that you were getting for the Zombies model occurs during a
>>>'moveTo'
>>
>>>operation. They may have the same root cause, but for now let's work on
>>
>>>just one of them. I recommend the Zombies model first, because I have
>>>all
>>
>>>the code for it already.
>>
>>>
>>
>>>If you send me the full output you are getting when you run the Zombies
>>
>>>model, and the command line and the properties file that you use when
>>>you
>>
>>>get that specific error, I'm sure we can figure it out. Also, I'm not
>>>sure
>>
>>>what you mean by 'the compiled form' vs. 'when you compiled it using
>>>VS';
>>
>>>do you have two different systems that you are using it on, and if so
>>>what
>>
>>>are they?
>>
>>>
>>
>>>Best,
>>
>>>John
>>
>>>
>>
>>>--
>>
>>>John T. Murphy
>>
>>>Computational Postdoctoral Fellow
>>
>>>Decision and Information Sciences and
>>
>>>Argonne Leadership Computing Facility
>>
>>>Argonne National Laboratory
>>
>>>jtm...@an...<mailto:jtm...@an...>
>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>
>>>On 7/26/11 3:29 AM, "Kashif Zia"
>><ka...@pe...<mailto:ka...@pe...>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>
>>>>Hello John
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>I ran rumor model both in compiled form and when I compiled it using
>>>>VS.
>>
>>>>It
>>
>>>>running perfect. For zombie_model, even the compiled example (with
>>>>given
>>
>>>>props files) is giving the same access violation error.
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>So it can be concluded that there is some problem with parallelism in
>>
>>>>zombie
>>
>>>>model when it is running on my system. I do not know what?
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>With Best Regards.
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>---
>>
>>>>Kashif Zia
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>PhD Candidate
>>
>>>>Institut für Pervasive Computing, Johannes Kepler Universität Linz,
>>
>>>>Altenberger Straße 69, A-4040 Linz
>>
>>>>Room: P105, Phone: +43-732-2468-9673, Fax: +43-732-2468-8426
>>
>>>>E-Mail: ka...@pe...<mailto:ka...@pe...>
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>
>>>>From: Murphy, John T. [mailto:jtm...@an...]
>>
>>>>Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2011 3:30 AM
>>
>>>>To:
>>rep...@li...<mailto:rep...@li...
>>f
>>or
>>ge.net>
>>
>>>>Subject: Re: [Repast-interest] Extending Patch class in Repast HPC
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>Kashif,
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>You should be able to run with the /np 4 switch even on a machine with
>>
>>>>only
>>
>>>>two processors; the additional processes are run as separate threads.
>>>>It
>>
>>>>won't be as fast as on a machine with 4 independent processors, but it
>>
>>>>should run.
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>That said, the proc.per.x and proc.per.y properties in the Zombies
>>>>model
>>
>>>>have to match the number of processes when they are multiplied, not
>>
>>>>added.
>>
>>>>The properties indicate the number of processes in the 'x' and 'y'
>>
>>>>directions in the model's space; 2 x 2 = 4, 2 x 4 = 8, etc., are valid,
>>
>>>>but
>>
>>>>the last settings you say you used, proc.per.x = 1, proc.per.y = 1, /np
>>>>2
>>
>>>>are not.
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>I'll have to check on the error tomorrow. There is no actual error
>>>>shown
>>
>>>>in
>>
>>>>the text you sent. Could you re-send? Or you can wait until your
>>>>cluster
>>
>>>>is
>>
>>>>installed and try again then.
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>Best,
>>
>>>>John
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>John T. Murphy, PhD, M.A. Ed.
>>
>>>>Computational Postdoctoral Fellow
>>
>>>>Argonne National Laboratory
>>
>>>>jtm...@an...<mailto:jtm...@an...>
>>
>>>>________________________________________
>>
>>>>From: Kashif Zia
>>>>[ka...@pe...<mailto:ka...@pe...>]
>>
>>>>Sent: Monday, July 25, 2011 7:49 AM
>>
>>>>To: Murphy, John T.;
>>rep...@li...<mailto:rep...@li...
>>f
>>or
>>ge.net>
>>
>>>>Subject: RE: [Repast-interest] Extending Patch class in Repast HPC
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>Hello John
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>My error remains there.
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>About number of processors, it seems to be reason. Unfortunately I only
>>
>>>>can
>>
>>>>use my own system with 2 processors right now. With switch np = 4, the
>>
>>>>following error is generated:
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>>
>>
>>>>>simple_following_model.exe!std::vector<double,std::allocator<double>
>>
>>>>>::size() Line 879 + 0x6 bytes C++
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>simple_following_model.exe!std::vector<double,std::allocator<double>
>>
>>>>>::operator[](unsigned int _Pos=0) Line 914 + 0x8 bytes C++
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>simple_following_model.exe!repast::Point<double>::operator[](unsigned
>>>>int
>>
>>>>index=0) Line 206 C++
>>
>>>> simple_following_model.exe!repast::relogo::RelogoAgent::xCor()
>>
>>>>Line
>>
>>>>51 + 0xd bytes C++
>>
>>>> simple_following_model.exe!InitializeTarget::operator()(AmI *
>>
>>>>device=0x02544e00) Line 25 + 0x8 bytes C++
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>simple_following_model.exe!repast::relogo::AgentSet<AmI>::apply<Initial
>>>>i
>>>>z
>>
>>>>e
>>
>>>>Ta
>>
>>>>rget>(const InitializeTarget & func={...}) Line 412 + 0x13 bytes
>>
>>>>C++
>>
>>>>
>>>>simple_following_model.exe!FollowingObserver::initializeAmIDir()
>>
>>>>Line 56 + 0x34 bytes C++
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>simple_following_model.exe!FollowingObserver::setup(repast::Properties
>>
>>>>props={...}) Line 92 C++
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>simple_following_model.exe!repast::relogo::SimulationRunner::run<Follow
>>>>i
>>>>n
>>
>>>>g
>>
>>>>Ob
>>
>>>>server,patchExt>(repast::Properties & props={...}) Line 117 C++
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>simple_following_model.exe!runFollowing(std::basic_string<char,std::cha
>>>>r
>>>>_
>>
>>>>t
>>
>>>>ra
>>
>>>>its<char>,std::allocator<char> > propsFile="zombie.props") Line 35
>>
>>>>C++
>>
>>>> simple_following_model.exe!main(int argc=3, char * *
>>
>>>>argv=0x009860b8) Line 55 + 0x1f bytes C++
>>
>>>> simple_following_model.exe!__tmainCRTStartup() Line 555 + 0x19
>>
>>>>bytes C
>>
>>>> simple_following_model.exe!mainCRTStartup() Line 371 C
>>
>>>> kernel32.dll!7c817077()
>>
>>>> [Frames below may be incorrect and/or missing, no symbols
>>>>loaded
>>
>>>>for
>>
>>>>kernel32.dll]
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>simple_following_model.exe!std::_Vector_const_iterator<std::_Vector_val
>>>><
>>>>A
>>
>>>>m
>>
>>>>I
>>
>>>>*,std::allocator<AmI *> > >::_Compat(const
>>
>>>>std::_Vector_const_iterator<std::_Vector_val<AmI *,std::allocator<AmI
>>>>*>
>>
>>>>> >
>>
>>>>& _Right=...) Line 241 + 0x2 bytes C++
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>I also tried it with /np 2 changing the 'proc.per.x = 1' and
>>>>'proc.per.y
>>
>>>>=
>>
>>>>1'. But it does not work.
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>Our cluster facility is getting ready; installation etc. As soon as I
>>>>get
>>
>>>>it
>>
>>>>running on that facility, I will let you know.
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>Thanks for consistent support.
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>Best Regards.
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>---
>>
>>>>Kashif Zia
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>PhD Candidate
>>
>>>>Institut für Pervasive Computing, Johannes Kepler Universität Linz,
>>
>>>>Altenberger Straße 69, A-4040 Linz
>>
>>>>Room: P105, Phone: +43-732-2468-9673, Fax: +43-732-2468-8426
>>
>>>>E-Mail: ka...@pe...<mailto:ka...@pe...>
>>
>>>>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>-
>>>>-
>>
>>>>-
>>
>>>>--
>>
>>>>--
>>
>>>>Magic Quadrant for Content-Aware Data Loss Prevention
>>
>>>>Research study explores the data loss prevention market. Includes
>>
>>>>in-depth
>>
>>>>analysis on the changes within the DLP market, and the criteria used to
>>
>>>>evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of these DLP solutions.
>>
>>>>http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51385063/
>>
>>>>_______________________________________________
>>
>>>>Repast-interest mailing list
>>
>>>>Rep...@li...<mailto:Rep...@li...
>>>>c
>>>>ef
>>orge.net>
>>
>>>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/repast-interest
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>
>>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>-
>>>-
>>
>>>--
>>
>>>--
>>
>>>Magic Quadrant for Content-Aware Data Loss Prevention
>>
>>>Research study explores the data loss prevention market. Includes
>>>in-depth
>>
>>>analysis on the changes within the DLP market, and the criteria used to
>>
>>>evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of these DLP solutions.
>>
>>>http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51385063/
>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>
>>>Repast-interest mailing list
>>
>>>Rep...@li...<mailto:Rep...@li...
>>>e
>>>fo
>>rge.net>
>>
>>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/repast-interest
>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>-
>>--
>>--
>>
>>Magic Quadrant for Content-Aware Data Loss Prevention
>>
>>Research study explores the data loss prevention market. Includes
>>in-depth
>>
>>analysis on the changes within the DLP market, and the criteria used to
>>
>>evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of these DLP solutions.
>>
>>http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51385063/
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>
>>Repast-interest mailing list
>>
>>Rep...@li...<mailto:Rep...@li...
>>f
>>or
>>ge.net>
>>
>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/repast-interest
>>
>>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>-
>>--
>>--
>>Magic Quadrant for Content-Aware Data Loss Prevention
>>Research study explores the data loss prevention market. Includes
>>in-depth
>>analysis on the changes within the DLP market, and the criteria used to
>>evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of these DLP solutions.
>>http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51385063/
>>_______________________________________________
>>Repast-interest mailing list
>>Rep...@li...
>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/repast-interest
>>
>>
>
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>--
>--
>Got Input? Slashdot Needs You.
>Take our quick survey online. Come on, we don't ask for help often.
>Plus, you'll get a chance to win $100 to spend on ThinkGeek.
>http://p.sf.net/sfu/slashdot-survey
>_______________________________________________
>Repast-interest mailing list
>Rep...@li...
>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/repast-interest
>
>
|
