[mpiwg-rma] iflush ticket needed

[Jeff Hammond]

Why not email? Telecons with more than 4 people are nearly always a waste of time.  They serialize communication, are synchronous and volatile. Email is none of these bad things. 

I need another telecon like I need a hole in my head. 

Jeff 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Dec 11, 2014, at 9:19 PM, Balaji, Pavan <balaji at anl.gov> wrote:
> 
> 
> Can we discuss this on the WG telecon (which the chair needs to restart)?
> 
> I'd like to first put together rough thoughts on the semantics in slides before writing up text.  Specific issues to clarify:
> 
> 1. What happens when one thread is waiting on an iflush request while another thread keeps posting more operations.
> 
> 2. What are the ordering semantics for two consecutive nonblocking iflush operations?  Can they finish out of order?  If they finish out of order, what are the semantics of accumulate operations with these epochs?  Are they ordered?
> 
> 3. What are the semantics of put operations in two nonblocking epochs?  Can they overwrite each other?
> 
> There might be more issues that need clarification too.  I'm happy to make slides discussing a first draft of these (and more perhaps), but I don't want the discussion to be over email.
> 
> -- Pavan
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On Dec 10, 2014, at 2:57 PM, Jeff Hammond <jeff.science at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> We really need a ticket i.e. a substantive written proposal for
>> iflush, etc. in order to make progress on the umbrella topic that
>> includes it and #459.
>> 
>> Pavan: Please let me know when you will have something for this.
>> 
>> Jeff
>> 
>> 
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: MPI Forum <mpi-forum at lists.mpi-forum.org>
>> Date: Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 11:11 AM
>> Subject: Re: [MPI Forum] #459: RMA sync ops with vector of windows
>> To:
>> 
>> 
>> #459: RMA sync ops with vector of windows
>> -------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
>> Reporter:  jhammond                  |                  Owner:  jhammond
>>   Type:  New routine(s)            |                 Status:  assigned
>> Priority:  Not ready / author        |              Milestone:  2014/12/08
>> rework                             |  California, USA
>> Version:  MPI 4.0                   |             Resolution:
>> Keywords:  RMA                       |  Implementation status:  Waiting
>> -------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
>> 
>> Comment (by gropp):
>> 
>> The WG found this interesting, but notes that there are alternatives that
>> may provide the same capability.  These include nonblocking flush.  In a
>> straw vote,  iflush received 11 votes and nflush received 3; in contrast,
>> nsync received 9 and isync received 4.
>> 
>> --
>> Ticket URL: <https://svn.mpi-forum.org/trac/mpi-forum-web/ticket/459#comment:3>
>> MPI Forum <https://svn.mpi-forum.org/>
>> MPI Forum
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Jeff Hammond
>> jeff.science at gmail.com
>> http://jeffhammond.github.io/
>> _______________________________________________
>> mpiwg-rma mailing list
>> mpiwg-rma at lists.mpi-forum.org
>> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-rma
> _______________________________________________
> mpiwg-rma mailing list
> mpiwg-rma at lists.mpi-forum.org
> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpiwg-rma