On Mon, 3 Feb 1997, Raja Daoud wrote:
> Date: Mon, 03 Feb 1997 14:54:54 CST
> From: Raja Daoud <raja@tbag.rsn.hp.com>
> To: Eric Salo <salo@mrjones.engr.sgi.com>
> Cc: mpi-coll@mcs.anl.gov
> Subject: Re: Another proposal
>
> >Seems like a relatively harmless addition to the standard, since we can just
> >throw a loop around current MPI-1 calls
>
> :-)
>
> >shouldn't a high-quality application
> >just manage a small pool of communicators for the best performance?
>
> Yup. In MPI-1, the story was that a high-qual impl. would pre-allocate
> N context IDs at comm-create time, allowing the next N-1 comm-dup to be
> lightweight (and reuse the context IDs, etc.).
>
> So a new function isn't needed. If the thinking is that this function
> will help push implementors to do this kind of context ID mgmt, Eric
> just showed how futile that can be.
>
> To make things really "fun" for users, implementors could make this new
> function very heavyweight (N allreduce), while optmizing good old
> MPI_Comm_dup() to pre-allocate context IDs. This would help push users
> to stick to good MPI-1 functions. :-) :-) :-)
>
> --Raja
>
> -=-
> Raja Daoud Hewlett-Packard Co.
> raja@rsn.hp.com Convex Division
>
Anthony Skjellum, PhD, Associate Professor of Computer Science;
Mississippi State University, Department of Computer Science & NSF ERC
Butler, Rm 300, PO Box 9637, Corner of Perry&Barr, Mississippi State,MS 39762
(601)325-8435 FAX: (601)325-8997; http://www.erc.msstate.edu/~tony;
"Persistence is fertile." ; e-mail: tony@cs.msstate.edu; Try MPI!