Dolphin Wulfkit
Many of your questions may have already been answered in earlier discussions or in the FAQ. The search results page will indicate current discussions as well as past list serves, articles, and papers.
Patrick Geoffray patrick at myri.comFri May 3 20:35:33 PDT 2002
- Previous message: Dolphin Wulfkit
- Next message: Dolphin Wulfkit
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Tony Skjellum wrote: > Lazy memory unlocking breaks correct programs that use memory > dynamically. It means that the programmer must program in a > restricted way with memory that is subject to send/receive. Why is that ? It's possible to implement lazy memory unlocking without imposing any constraint on the application. > Persistent send/receive has no such disadvantages, it is within the > standard and the original programming model that allows users to > work with arbitrary memory. It works with all MPI implementations, > and so is fully portable. The problem here is not in the implementations, it's in the education. I agree with Joachim when he says that the use of persistent requests is very rare. It's not unused because it's wrong, it's unused because the vast majority of the MPI developers have no clue what it's good for. When I learned MPI a few years ago, nobody taught me about persistent requests, nada about complex datatypes: send/receive, blocking/non-blocking, a little bit of collective and basta. MPI programmers usually don't know how to write good MPI code. I know you work a lot on this topic, but it won't change this context anytime soon. The second problem is the egg/chicken kind of thing. The complex datatypes are not optimized very well in most MPI implementations. Well, nobody uses them because they are not optimized, and nobody will optimized them because nobody uses them. It's like collective communications in MPICH: they suck, so if you want to run efficient code, you write yourself the collective you need. Then, the pressure on the MPICH team to optimize the collectives is not important. Do I spend time optimizing something that a tiny fraction of my users will effectively use or do I care about far more frequent poorly written applications ? It's a shame, I agree, but it's the trade-off all MPI implementations are playing with :-( Patrick ---------------------------------------------------------- | Patrick Geoffray, Ph.D. patrick at myri.com | Myricom, Inc. http://www.myri.com | Cell: 865-389-8852 685 Emory Valley Rd (B) | Phone: 865-425-0978 Oak Ridge, TN 37830 ----------------------------------------------------------
- Previous message: Dolphin Wulfkit
- Next message: Dolphin Wulfkit
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
