[Mpi-forum] MPI user survey

Supalov, Alexander alexander.supalov at intel.com
Mon Nov 16 11:30:44 CST 2009

Let me try: "Do you want to have a way in MPI-3 to trade feature richness for performance (thru subsetting, assertions, etc.)?"

-----Original Message-----
From: mpi-forum-bounces at lists.mpi-forum.org [mailto:mpi-forum-bounces at lists.mpi-forum.org] On Behalf Of Jeff Squyres
Sent: Monday, November 16, 2009 4:39 PM
To: Main MPI Forum mailing list
Subject: Re: [Mpi-forum] MPI user survey

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

mpi-forum mailing list
mpi-forum at lists.mpi-forum.org
Intel GmbH
Dornacher Strasse 1
85622 Feldkirchen/Muenchen Germany
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Feldkirchen bei Muenchen
Geschaeftsfuehrer: Douglas Lusk, Peter Gleissner, Hannes Schwaderer
Registergericht: Muenchen HRB 47456 Ust.-IdNr.
VAT Registration No.: DE129385895
Citibank Frankfurt (BLZ 502 109 00) 600119052

This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for
the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution
by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended
recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.

More information about the mpi-forum mailing list