Which MPI implementation for MPI-2? ...
lindahl at keyresearch.com
Thu Apr 3 04:04:01 EST 2003
On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 02:11:20PM -0600, Richard Walsh wrote:
> Somewhat tangentially, but while we are on the subject of one-sided
> communications in MPI-2, am I correct in assuming that this capability
> is implemented as it is in SHMEM ...
No. It's much more complicated and general. You have to register
windows within which one-sided ops can be used, and there are some
extra calls that you make to make sure operations have completed.
UPC is a much more compact method of expressing one-sided calls, and
unlike shmem, it can benefit from pipelined transfers.
> It would seem to be a requirement for speed and would
> also seem to require the use of identical binaries on each processor
> (and COMMON or static to place data in a symmetric location).
shmem doesn't require that; you can use a common address (I'm very
punny at 1am) to exchange addresses of malloc-ed data. But with shmem,
you get a free registration of all static & common variables, and the
stack too, as long as you use it in a consistant fashion.
Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf at beowulf.org
To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf
More information about the Beowulf