[Mpi-forum] Info Keys Ticket

[Jim Dinan]

Just wanted to respond to the incomplete comment --

The intention with the info keys ticket was always to bring forward each
info key or info key topic as a separate ticket.  I know there are a lot of
info keys left that are very important, and hopefully we can continue to
reach consensus and bring them forward to be voted on.  The wildcards info
key proposal really represents the start of that process and should chart
the course for future proposals.

 ~Jim.

On Sun, Nov 30, 2014 at 11:32 AM, Richard Graham <richardg at mellanox.com>
wrote:

>  It has some of the interested parties, not all.  I am interested in such
> items, and thought that the whole topic had fallen off the plate, so was
> very surprised to hear there is a concrete proposal, which in my view is
> incomplete.
>
>
>
> Rich
>
>
>
> *From:* mpi-forum [mailto:mpi-forum-bounces at lists.mpi-forum.org] *On
> Behalf Of *Jeff Hammond
> *Sent:* Monday, December 01, 2014 3:29 AM
> *To:* Main MPI Forum mailing list
> *Subject:* Re: [Mpi-forum] Info Keys Ticket
>
>
>
> Hybrid WG already had all the interested parties and was active. I don't
> recall p2p WG was particularly active when discussion of 381 started ~2
> years ago.
>
>
>
> As always, every member of the forum can participate in any WG and 381/461
> were always discussed in the open for anyone to see.
>
>
>
> As it currently stands, p2p WG has more than enough to discuss without
> this ticket.
>
>
>
> Note also that some of the info keys discussed have a greater impact when
> threads are involved, hence are connected to hybrid.
>
>
>
> Jeff
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>
> On Nov 30, 2014, at 8:23 AM, Richard Graham <richardg at mellanox.com> wrote:
>
>  Why is such a proposal coming out of the hybrid working group ?  This is
> more appropriate for the point-to-point working group.  Not that it is that
> critical what the group name is, but more to get feedback from a wide range
> of folks interested is such topics.
>
>
>
> Rich
>
>
>
> *From:* mpi-forum [mailto:mpi-forum-bounces at lists.mpi-forum.org
> <mpi-forum-bounces at lists.mpi-forum.org>] *On Behalf Of *Jim Dinan
> *Sent:* Saturday, November 22, 2014 8:58 AM
> *To:* Main MPI Forum mailing list
> *Subject:* [Mpi-forum] Info Keys Ticket
>
>
>
> Hi All,
>
>
>
> The hybrid working group would like to put forward ticket #461 (
> https://svn.mpi-forum.org/trac/mpi-forum-web/ticket/461) for
> consideration for MPI 3.1, with a formal reading at the upcoming December
> meeting.
>
>
>
> This ticket proposes the no_any_tag and no_any_source info keys, on which
> we have achieved consensus.  We continue to have vigorous and productive
> debate on additional communicator info keys proposals that have been
> captured in #381.  We will pursue these additional proposals for MPI 4.0.
>
>
>
> Thanks and see you in December,
>
>  ~Jim.
>
>
>
>  _______________________________________________
> mpi-forum mailing list
> mpi-forum at lists.mpi-forum.org
> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> mpi-forum mailing list
> mpi-forum at lists.mpi-forum.org
> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mpi-forum.org/pipermail/mpi-forum/attachments/20141201/17c3fb8d/attachment-0001.html>