[MPI3-IO] shared file pointer

[Mohamad Chaarawi]

Hi Dries,

I'm jumping late on this thread, but to summarize so far (and correct me 
if I made a mistake understanding), we have two cases:

1) two non-blocking collective shared FP operations:

	MPI_File_iread_ordered
	MPI_File_iread_ordered

This will be ordered in the sense that the user will see that the first 
operations will occur before the second one.

2) mixed collective and independent

         MPI_File_iread_ordered
	MPI_File_read_shared

Where the choices that you mentioned apply, right?

  * make that case illegal
  * make it undefined

As you mentioned that since the split collectives leave it as undefined, 
makes me lean more towards keeping it that way.

Thanks,
Mohamad



On 02/02/2012 04:22 PM, Dries Kimpe wrote:
> There might be some use in 'undefined ordering' as opposed to 'illegal'
> for those application that don't care about the ordering.
>
> Applications that do rely on the ordering can easily use the existing MPI
> functions to enforce ordering.
>
> So, the way I see it: 2 choices:
> 1) Say order is undefined in the standard (basically there's a precedent
> with the split collective versions).
> 2) Say it is illegal. The user can duplicate the file handle and easily
> implement their own version of what they need.
>
> (2) is easier for the implementor.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mpi-forum.org/pipermail/mpiwg-io/attachments/20120206/e76e22f7/attachment-0001.html>