[Mpi-forum] MPI user survey
jeff.science at gmail.com
Mon Nov 16 09:22:41 CST 2009
Based upon the issues that came up most of the meeting, we could
append the question to:
x. MPI one-sided communication performance is more important to me
than supporting a rich remote memory access (RMA) feature set.
Complex user-defined datatypes and arbitrary remote atomics are
examples of features that ~may~ lead to reduced performance for some
MPI implementations and/or hardware architectures.
However, any such enumeration will lead to a minefield of user assumptions.
On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 7:15 AM, Richard Treumann <treumann at us.ibm.com> wrote:
> MPI one-sided communication performance is more important to me than supporting a rich remote memory access (RMA) feature set.
> Having been involved in several email discussions and knowing what is being pressed, I can guess the desired answer. We cannot legitimately make decisions based on such an ambiguous question: What expectations of typical MPI communication are included in "rich"? Is using any communicator except MPI_COMM_WORLD part of "rich"? Is getting a non-MPI_SUCCESS return code for an error part of rich?
Argonne Leadership Computing Facility
jhammond at mcs.anl.gov / (630) 252-5381
More information about the mpi-forum