MPI Forum Meetings logo

MPI Forum: mpi-22 Mailing List Archives
all MPI Forum: mpi-22 mailing list
 Mailing Lists
  mpi-21
  mpi-22
  mpi-buff_access
  mpi-comments
  mpi-forum
  mpi-const
  mpi3-abi
  mpi3-coll
  mpi3-fortran
  mpi3-ft
  mpi3-greq
  mpi3-hybridpm
  mpi3-misc
  mpi3-p2p
  mpi3-rma
  mpi3-subsetting
  mpi3-tools
  mpi3-wgleads
 Other MPI Sites
  Official MPI documents
  MPI errata
  MPI Forum Meetings
 
Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

Subject: Re: [Mpi-22] mpi-22 Digest, Vol 2, Issue 7
From: Jeff Squyres (jsquyres_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-05-05 13:31:06

On May 5, 2008, at 1:28 PM, Supalov, Alexander wrote:

> Thank you. We can actually introduce what you propose, possibly with
> a query function to make it still easier to live with, as early as
> in MPI 2.2, as a subset precursor. Judging by the discussion in
> Chicago, subsets may not need much more than that in the end,
> possibly with a little more flags and semantics added in MPI-3.
>
> The reservation against 32- (or for that matter, 64-) bit limitation
> is the only one I have at the moment. Not being able to attach
> assertions to communicators, etc. may be missed by some advanced
> programmers, but here we need to be pragmatic: who will ever want to
> go that deep?

Libraries that build on top of MPI may want to. This was one of the
prime motivations for communications, right? (private/safe
communications) As Quincy stated in Chicago and on the mailing list
(IIRC), what if a top-level app sets an assertion that a library using
MPI can't live with? Being able to set them per-communicator might
alleviate that issue. 

-- 
Jeff Squyres
Cisco Systems
Date view Thread view Subject view Author view
[Flag]
 This site is located in:
Bloomington, IN, USA
Send corrections and updates to the MPI forum list Page last modified: 5-May-2008