[Mpi-forum] MPI user survey

Jeff Squyres jsquyres at cisco.com
Mon Nov 16 09:39:09 CST 2009

On Nov 16, 2009, at 7:28 AM, Supalov, Alexander wrote:

> Why don't we ask directly: do you want to have subsets in MPI-3 to  
> trade feature richness for performance if you care?

We didn't ask about subsets at all because the WG is "on hold".  Do  
you want to introduce a new question?  If so, can you suggest the  
specific wording?

Note that Keith suggested an improved wording for the RMA question  
(this was buried in my reply to Dick):

"MPI one-sided communication performance (e.g., message rate and  
latency) is more important to me than supporting a rich remote memory  
access (RMA) feature set (e.g., communicators, datatypes)."

Jeff H. replied to me off-list that he liked this better than his  
suggestion.  Does anyone else have any suggestions / comments on this  

Jeff Squyres
jsquyres at cisco.com

More information about the mpi-forum mailing list