[Mpi3-hybridpm] endpoint proposal

Anthony Skjellum tony at runtimecomputing.com
Sat May 22 12:07:38 CDT 2010

MPI_Comm_merge is very useful esp. On intercommunicators, or as a form of inverse to split
(K inputs, K bigger than 2)

Tony Skjellum, PhD
RunTime Computing Solutions, LLC
tony at runtimecomputing.com
direct: +1-205-314-3595
cell:    +1-205-807-4968

-----Original Message-----
From: Pavan Balaji <balaji at mcs.anl.gov>
Date: Sat, 22 May 2010 11:57:08 
To: <mpi3-hybridpm at lists.mpi-forum.org>
Subject: Re: [Mpi3-hybridpm] endpoint proposal

On 05/19/2010 06:55 PM, Snir, Marc wrote:
> Page 20 -- do we want MPI_COMM_MERGE? Useful but takes a while to explain

FWIW, I've talked to Torsten about pursuing this in the collectives 
working group, as that's where it really belongs.

Using an MPI_COMM_MERGE function is *much* more cleaner than the 
extraction of endpoints from each process like was previously proposed, 
IMHO. The only major issue raised was that this is probably the only 
function that's collective over two communicators, instead of one.

  -- Pavan

Pavan Balaji
Mpi3-hybridpm mailing list
Mpi3-hybridpm at lists.mpi-forum.org

More information about the mpiwg-hybridpm mailing list