[Beowulf] Re: Re: Home beowulf - NIC latencies
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.comWed Feb 16 00:17:02 PST 2005
- Previous message: [Beowulf] Block send mpi
- Next message: [Beowulf] Re: Re: Home beowulf - NIC latencies
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Keith D. Underwood wrote: >>c) ban of the ANY_SENDER wildcard: a world of optimization goes away >>with this convenience. > > > Um, our apps guys say this is more than a convenience. Apparently, > sometimes you don't exactly know who you are going to receive from. > Would you rather them post receives from 4000 nodes and cancel the ones > that don't send to that node after a while? No, I would not post any receives and let them come unexpected, sing MPI_Probe() to post a matching receive when something show up. It leaves the MPI implementation a way to move most of the matching to the send side for most of the messages and, if the receive is posted early enough, remove the need for host CPU on the receive side when the application is potentially computing. And you remind me, I would ban MPI_Cancel also. It should have been the item #1 :-) Patrick -- Patrick Geoffray Myricom, Inc. http://www.myri.com
- Previous message: [Beowulf] Block send mpi
- Next message: [Beowulf] Re: Re: Home beowulf - NIC latencies
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
