[mpiwg-tools] Feedback from the forum
schulz6 at llnl.gov
Thu Sep 12 11:56:46 CDT 2013
On Sep 12, 2013, at 6:25 PM, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) <jsquyres at cisco.com> wrote:
> On Sep 12, 2013, at 5:35 PM, Martin Schulz <schulz6 at llnl.gov> wrote:
>> Also, there were questions on the definition of a "unique image" - at the end people seemed to be OK with it, but would like to see a cleaner definition for the next forward looking version of MQD. In particular, it should cover the case where multiple MPI processes are in one OS process.
> I'm not too concerned about this particular piece of feedback:
> 1. It came from Torsten who had never read the proposal before.
> 2. If the document doesn't handle the MPI-processes-as-threads concept, then so be it -- this is a documentation of current practice. We welcome their proposal for v2.0 of the document.
I agree (in case this didn't come across) - it should be OK for the current version, but will be a point of discussion once/if we work on the next generation of the next document.
> Jeff Squyres
> jsquyres at cisco.com
> For corporate legal information go to: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/
> mpiwg-tools mailing list
> mpiwg-tools at lists.mpi-forum.org
More information about the mpiwg-tools