-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 301
[RTM] RF: Split recon-all into coarse chunks to improve resource use estimates #506
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
13 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
2a4a013
RF: Split recon-all directives to adjust parallelism
effigies b1c9588
De-duplicate surface outputs
effigies cd9a0e6
Remove get_surfaces iterable node
effigies 47e15ff
Use autorecon3 instead of recon-all -all to finish
effigies c9b0c8a
Update recon node names
effigies 4172e59
DOC: Update changelog
effigies cc7e105
Adjust recon flags
effigies 1833ab3
RF: Use iterables instead of MapNode to manage parallelism
effigies 7c8772e
RF: Separate autorecon_resume and gifti_surface workflows
effigies 2b60563
Add sync point, postpone hyporelabel
effigies ba3367e
RF: Switch back to MapNodes for conciseness
effigies 01de20a
DOC: Describe subprocess breakdown
effigies a52a040
DOC: Update doc pins
effigies File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
On a 6-core machine, I'm getting both 5-thread jobs in this mapnode running simultaneously. @oesteban I think you're more familiar with the resource manager than I am. Do you see something wrong here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
doesn't omp_nthreahds default to nthreads-1?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes. But we shouldn't be able to run two 5-thread jobs on a 6-thread queue... I think?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes that is correct. I wonder if this is because MultiProc is not handling MapNodes correctly.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah, I think the possibilities are:
num_threads
specified differently from other nodesThere was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Might be worth opening an issue at nipy/nipype and pinging Cameron.