[Mpi3-ft] New RMA functions
buntinas at mcs.anl.gov
Thu Feb 24 11:04:12 CST 2011
Would we need to add a status object to the sync operations? We should be able to use the return code.
We may have issues with operations that complete locally and return MPI_SUCCESS, but then later fail when they actually perform the communication, but we already have this issue with regular sends.
I don't believe that we are making (or can make, without requiring every operation to be synchronous) the guarantee that if an operation returns MPI_SUCCESS that it was successfully delivered in the presence of a permanent failure (e.g., permanent network bisection or process failure).
On Feb 24, 2011, at 9:53 AM, Pavan Balaji wrote:
> 1. The existing PUT/GET/ACCUMULATE operations which are from MPI-2.2. They will not take a request operand, and we want to retain it that way to minimize the performance overhead. Synchronization calls (such as closing an epoch or flush/flushall) wait for their completion, but they do not return a status object currently. Adding a status object to the synchronization calls is an option, though that'll require extensive changes. But adding them to the PUT/GET/ACCUMULATE operations themselves would beat the purpose of low-overhead communication, so that might not be doable.
More information about the mpiwg-ft