BP rmethod does not work?

[ianfoster]

Initial comment: The README in stage_write says that BP is a valid rmethod. But it doesn't seem to work (see below).

Follow on comment: I understand that MPI and BP allow for coupling via files. Let's make this example show how that is done.

./run-workflow.sh 4
swift: launching: ./heat_transfer_adios2
size: 6
swift: launching: stage_write/stage_write
Input stream = heat.bp
Output stream = staged.bp
Read method = BP (id=0)
Read method parameters = "max_chunk_size=100; app_id =32767;
verbose= 3;poll_interval = 100;"
Write method = MPI
Write method parameters = ""
Variable to transform = ""
Transform parameters = ""

Waiting to open stream heat.bp...
ERROR: MPI open failed for heat.bp: 'File does not exist, error stack:
ADIOI_UFS_OPEN(69): File heat.bp does not exist'
Process number : 1 x 1
Array size per process at first step: 100 x 100
Step 1:
ERROR: MPI open failed for heat.bp: 'File does not exist, error stack:
ADIOI_UFS_OPEN(69): File heat.bp does not exist'
Writing: filename size(GB) io_time(sec) GB/s

[jychoi-hpc]

Although I created a version for file-based heat_transfer/stage_write coupling in #8, it looks like it can create more confusions to users. File-based coupling needs extra cares for execution orders, which is out of CoDAR's focuses, I think. We can use file-based coupling for debugging purposes to developers.

In this release, I think, we better focus on staging methods like FLEXPATH and DATASPACES. How do you think, @ianfoster ? Anyone, is there any other opinion?

[ianfoster]

This confuses me. Scott says that file based staging is a useful codesign option. IA that not true?

…

On Jul 19, 2017, at 3:11 PM, Jong Choi ***@***.***> wrote: Although I created a version for file-based heat_transfer/stage_write coupling in #8, it looks like it can create more confusions to users. File-based coupling needs extra cares for execution orders, which is out of CoDAR's focuses, I think. We can use file-based coupling for debugging purposes to developers. In this release, I think, we better focus on staging methods like FLEXPATH and DATASPACES. How do you think, @ianfoster ? Anyone, is there any other opinion? — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.

[jychoi-hpc]

I have just talked to Scott and discussed. I have convinced now that file-based coupling is worth supporting in this example. #8 supports file-based coupling now. I will integrate this branch into the main.