September 2011 - mpi-forum - mailman3.cels.anl.gov

Re: [Mpi-forum] Meeting schedule for 2012
by Fab Tillier 20 Sep '11

20 Sep '11

Or maybe you just end up missing one meeting per year. You'd still retain voting rights if you attended the rest of the meetings. This isn't that different than trying to get to Santorini - it too is cost prohibitive, not to mention requiring a handful of layovers when flying from the US west coast. The solution (for me at least) is to miss the Santorini meeting. This slows down the progress on my proposals, but such is life. Cheers, -Fab Rolf Rabenseifner wrote on Tue, 20 Sep 2011 at 14:11:30 > To make it very clear, > acceptable flight prices rely on > - weekend (is given wen combining EuroMPI and MPI-Forum meeting) > - or crossed tickets bought long in advance > (form on continent to another) > - or staying within US. > > One meeting in Japan implies that the flght must be extended > to get tourist prices. > > This is against our current rules, having meetings only > in a way that short trips are possible > - for EU: Monday - Thursday > - for J: Sunday - Wednesday > - jor US: Monday - Wednesday > > The cheapestr flight from Stuttgart to Tokyo, > Sunday May 6 - Wednesday May 9 and only 1 stop is > 1757 Euro = 2408 US $. > This is a no-go. > > To keep flight prices low, we decided only to go to Chicago. > To still keep them low and to be convinient for Japaneese > attendendees, we decided to toggle between Chicago and SFO. > > Best regards > Rolf > > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Jeff Squyres" <jsquyres(a)cisco.com> >> To: "Main MPI Forum mailing list" <mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org> >> Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2011 5:55:59 PM >> Subject: Re: [Mpi-forum] Meeting schedule for 2012 >> Various companies (including mine) have reasonable telepresence >> solutions. However, they (all?) require dedicated equipment, which >> most people assumedly don't have. >> >> Webex recently introduced higher-quality video streaming, and it's >> pretty nice. But the video is still more-or-less focused on individual >> people. I haven't tried room-wide camera with webex (e.g., have 1 or >> more camera in the Forum meeting room). I'm sure it could be done if >> we cared. >> >> Audio is the other problem. Telepresence systems have very well-tuned >> audio such that hearing the people on the other side works very well. >> With webex or normal teleconferencing, we'd have to put multiple >> micorophones throughout the meeting room. Then those on the remote >> side inevitably have to deal with chatter of those who are not >> involved in the main conversation, etc. >> >> Meaning: at a minimum, the Forum would need to meet in >> remote-audio-equipped room (i.e., a bunch of microphones around the >> room). >> >> >> On Sep 20, 2011, at 11:33 AM, Underwood, Keith D wrote: >> >>> It would help if somebody knew the state of the art for >>> telepresence. Any inputs? >>> >>> My best understanding is that there are really good solutions for >>> "some to some" interactions, but that the "some to many" problem >>> isn't solved. And, the "some to some" solutions seem to require a >>> preconfigured room. >>> >>> But, it is largely irrelevant: the 8 hour time difference from Japan >>> to pacific and 11 hours from Japan to eastern is likely to be the >>> actual prohibitive item for either far east participation in US >>> based meetings or US participation in far east meetings. It only >>> leaves you a few hours a day that are rational for participation. >>> Europe to the US is not quite as bad, but still a significant >>> challenge. >>> >>> Keith >>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: mpi-forum-bounces(a)lists.mpi-forum.org [mailto:mpi-forum- >>>> bounces(a)lists.mpi-forum.org] On Behalf Of Jeff Squyres >>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2011 6:59 AM >>>> To: Main MPI Forum mailing list >>>> Subject: Re: [Mpi-forum] Meeting schedule for 2012 >>>> >>>> This is a good starting point for the discussion. >>>> >>>> Other logistical issues will also need to be discussed, such as >>>> which >>>> video system to use (I firmly believe that audio-only participation >>>> will not be enough), how to get access to it, etc. >>>> >>>> Rich -- maybe you can talk about the issues surrounding virtual >>>> attendance at Santorini and/or in Chicago? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sep 20, 2011, at 9:52 AM, Jeff Hammond wrote: >>>> >>>>> what if digital attendance was only permitted by parties who were >>>>> already voting-eligible? that way, organizations with limited travel >>>>> funds could attend >50% of meetings in-person but still vote in the >>>>> remainder. for example, if you have to earn eligibility the >>>>> old-fashioned way (physical attendance), it immediately eliminates >>>>> all the flakes from the digital attendance pool. >>>>> >>>>> anyways, video telecons are still a pain in the arse no matter who >>>>> is >>>>> showing up that way. >>>>> >>>>> jeff >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 8:33 AM, Jeff Squyres <jsquyres(a)cisco.com> >>>> wrote: >>>>>> On Sep 20, 2011, at 9:27 AM, Jeff Hammond wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> I wonder at what point the MPI Forum will support digital >>>>>>> attendance. I guess someone must have looked into this and decided >>>>>>> that it was too much of pain in the arse. >>>>>> >>>>>> That has been the conclusion in the past -- plus, the Forum >>>> intentionally wanted to "raise the bar" for participation, trying >>>> to >>>> ensure that only those who really cared would actually be involved. >>>> This prevents (at least) two kinds of lazy participants: >>>>>> >>>>>> - those who only want their organization's name on the MPI roster >>>>>> - those who only attend occasional meetings (or worse, just a >>>> session or two here and there) and don't really have a good >>>> understanding of the Forum or the issues involved >>>>>> >>>>>> To be clear, Forum participation is open to anyone. But we really >>>> only want people who want to actually be *involved* -- not just >>>> someone >>>> who drops in for an occasional meeting and is (perhaps >>>> unintentionally) >>>> disruptive due to lack of knowledge/experience on how the Forum >>>> works, >>>> the body of complex issues that are being worked on, etc. >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Jeff Squyres >>>>>> jsquyres(a)cisco.com >>>>>> For corporate legal information go to: >>>>>> http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/ >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> mpi-forum mailing list >>>>>> mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org >>>>>> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Jeff Hammond >>>>> Argonne Leadership Computing Facility >>>>> University of Chicago Computation Institute >>>>> jhammond(a)alcf.anl.gov / (630) 252-5381 >>>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/jeffhammond >>>>> https://wiki.alcf.anl.gov/index.php/User:Jhammond >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> mpi-forum mailing list >>>>> mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org >>>>> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Jeff Squyres >>>> jsquyres(a)cisco.com >>>> For corporate legal information go to: >>>> http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/ >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> mpi-forum mailing list >>>> mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org >>>> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> mpi-forum mailing list >>> mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org >>> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum >> >> >> -- >> Jeff Squyres >> jsquyres(a)cisco.com >> For corporate legal information go to: >> http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/ >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> mpi-forum mailing list >> mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org >> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum >

1 0

Re: [Mpi-forum] Meeting schedule for 2012
by Rolf Rabenseifner 20 Sep '11

20 Sep '11

To make it very clear, acceptable flight prices rely on - weekend (is given wen combining EuroMPI and MPI-Forum meeting) - or crossed tickets bought long in advance (form on continent to another) - or staying within US. One meeting in Japan implies that the flght must be extended to get tourist prices. This is against our current rules, having meetings only in a way that short trips are possible - for EU: Monday - Thursday - for J: Sunday - Wednesday - jor US: Monday - Wednesday The cheapestr flight from Stuttgart to Tokyo, Sunday May 6 - Wednesday May 9 and only 1 stop is 1757 Euro = 2408 US $. This is a no-go. To keep flight prices low, we decided only to go to Chicago. To still keep them low and to be convinient for Japaneese attendendees, we decided to toggle between Chicago and SFO. Best regards Rolf ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jeff Squyres" <jsquyres(a)cisco.com> > To: "Main MPI Forum mailing list" <mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org> > Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2011 5:55:59 PM > Subject: Re: [Mpi-forum] Meeting schedule for 2012 > Various companies (including mine) have reasonable telepresence > solutions. However, they (all?) require dedicated equipment, which > most people assumedly don't have. > > Webex recently introduced higher-quality video streaming, and it's > pretty nice. But the video is still more-or-less focused on individual > people. I haven't tried room-wide camera with webex (e.g., have 1 or > more camera in the Forum meeting room). I'm sure it could be done if > we cared. > > Audio is the other problem. Telepresence systems have very well-tuned > audio such that hearing the people on the other side works very well. > With webex or normal teleconferencing, we'd have to put multiple > micorophones throughout the meeting room. Then those on the remote > side inevitably have to deal with chatter of those who are not > involved in the main conversation, etc. > > Meaning: at a minimum, the Forum would need to meet in > remote-audio-equipped room (i.e., a bunch of microphones around the > room). > > > On Sep 20, 2011, at 11:33 AM, Underwood, Keith D wrote: > > > It would help if somebody knew the state of the art for > > telepresence. Any inputs? > > > > My best understanding is that there are really good solutions for > > "some to some" interactions, but that the "some to many" problem > > isn't solved. And, the "some to some" solutions seem to require a > > preconfigured room. > > > > But, it is largely irrelevant: the 8 hour time difference from Japan > > to pacific and 11 hours from Japan to eastern is likely to be the > > actual prohibitive item for either far east participation in US > > based meetings or US participation in far east meetings. It only > > leaves you a few hours a day that are rational for participation. > > Europe to the US is not quite as bad, but still a significant > > challenge. > > > > Keith > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: mpi-forum-bounces(a)lists.mpi-forum.org [mailto:mpi-forum- > >> bounces(a)lists.mpi-forum.org] On Behalf Of Jeff Squyres > >> Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2011 6:59 AM > >> To: Main MPI Forum mailing list > >> Subject: Re: [Mpi-forum] Meeting schedule for 2012 > >> > >> This is a good starting point for the discussion. > >> > >> Other logistical issues will also need to be discussed, such as > >> which > >> video system to use (I firmly believe that audio-only participation > >> will not be enough), how to get access to it, etc. > >> > >> Rich -- maybe you can talk about the issues surrounding virtual > >> attendance at Santorini and/or in Chicago? > >> > >> > >> > >> On Sep 20, 2011, at 9:52 AM, Jeff Hammond wrote: > >> > >>> what if digital attendance was only permitted by parties who were > >>> already voting-eligible? that way, organizations with limited > >>> travel > >>> funds could attend >50% of meetings in-person but still vote in > >>> the > >>> remainder. for example, if you have to earn eligibility the > >>> old-fashioned way (physical attendance), it immediately eliminates > >> all > >>> the flakes from the digital attendance pool. > >>> > >>> anyways, video telecons are still a pain in the arse no matter who > >>> is > >>> showing up that way. > >>> > >>> jeff > >>> > >>> On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 8:33 AM, Jeff Squyres <jsquyres(a)cisco.com> > >> wrote: > >>>> On Sep 20, 2011, at 9:27 AM, Jeff Hammond wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> I wonder at what point the MPI Forum will support digital > >> attendance. > >>>>> I guess someone must have looked into this and decided that it > >>>>> was > >> too > >>>>> much of pain in the arse. > >>>> > >>>> That has been the conclusion in the past -- plus, the Forum > >> intentionally wanted to "raise the bar" for participation, trying > >> to > >> ensure that only those who really cared would actually be involved. > >> This prevents (at least) two kinds of lazy participants: > >>>> > >>>> - those who only want their organization's name on the MPI roster > >>>> - those who only attend occasional meetings (or worse, just a > >> session or two here and there) and don't really have a good > >> understanding of the Forum or the issues involved > >>>> > >>>> To be clear, Forum participation is open to anyone. But we really > >> only want people who want to actually be *involved* -- not just > >> someone > >> who drops in for an occasional meeting and is (perhaps > >> unintentionally) > >> disruptive due to lack of knowledge/experience on how the Forum > >> works, > >> the body of complex issues that are being worked on, etc. > >>>> > >>>> -- > >>>> Jeff Squyres > >>>> jsquyres(a)cisco.com > >>>> For corporate legal information go to: > >>>> http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/ > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> mpi-forum mailing list > >>>> mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > >>>> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Jeff Hammond > >>> Argonne Leadership Computing Facility > >>> University of Chicago Computation Institute > >>> jhammond(a)alcf.anl.gov / (630) 252-5381 > >>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/jeffhammond > >>> https://wiki.alcf.anl.gov/index.php/User:Jhammond > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> mpi-forum mailing list > >>> mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > >>> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Jeff Squyres > >> jsquyres(a)cisco.com > >> For corporate legal information go to: > >> http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/ > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> mpi-forum mailing list > >> mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > >> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum > > > > _______________________________________________ > > mpi-forum mailing list > > mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum > > > -- > Jeff Squyres > jsquyres(a)cisco.com > For corporate legal information go to: > http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/ > > > _______________________________________________ > mpi-forum mailing list > mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum -- Dr. Rolf Rabenseifner . . . . . . . . . .. email rabenseifner(a)hlrs.de High Performance Computing Center (HLRS) . phone ++49(0)711/685-65530 University of Stuttgart . . . . . . . . .. fax ++49(0)711 / 685-65832 Head of Dpmt Parallel Computing . . . www.hlrs.de/people/rabenseifner Nobelstr. 19, D-70550 Stuttgart, Germany . (Office: Allmandring 30)

1 0

PDF Diff app on Mac OSX
by Quincey Koziol 20 Sep '11

20 Sep '11

Hi all, We've had difficulty comparing our PDF documents in the past, maybe this application might help us: http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/pdiff-pdf-diff/id461762188?mt=12 Quincey

1 0

Re: [Mpi-forum] Meeting schedule for 2012
by Jeff Squyres 20 Sep '11

20 Sep '11

Various companies (including mine) have reasonable telepresence solutions. However, they (all?) require dedicated equipment, which most people assumedly don't have. Webex recently introduced higher-quality video streaming, and it's pretty nice. But the video is still more-or-less focused on individual people. I haven't tried room-wide camera with webex (e.g., have 1 or more camera in the Forum meeting room). I'm sure it could be done if we cared. Audio is the other problem. Telepresence systems have very well-tuned audio such that hearing the people on the other side works very well. With webex or normal teleconferencing, we'd have to put multiple micorophones throughout the meeting room. Then those on the remote side inevitably have to deal with chatter of those who are not involved in the main conversation, etc. Meaning: at a minimum, the Forum would need to meet in remote-audio-equipped room (i.e., a bunch of microphones around the room). On Sep 20, 2011, at 11:33 AM, Underwood, Keith D wrote: > It would help if somebody knew the state of the art for telepresence. Any inputs? > > My best understanding is that there are really good solutions for "some to some" interactions, but that the "some to many" problem isn't solved. And, the "some to some" solutions seem to require a preconfigured room. > > But, it is largely irrelevant: the 8 hour time difference from Japan to pacific and 11 hours from Japan to eastern is likely to be the actual prohibitive item for either far east participation in US based meetings or US participation in far east meetings. It only leaves you a few hours a day that are rational for participation. Europe to the US is not quite as bad, but still a significant challenge. > > Keith > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: mpi-forum-bounces(a)lists.mpi-forum.org [mailto:mpi-forum- >> bounces(a)lists.mpi-forum.org] On Behalf Of Jeff Squyres >> Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2011 6:59 AM >> To: Main MPI Forum mailing list >> Subject: Re: [Mpi-forum] Meeting schedule for 2012 >> >> This is a good starting point for the discussion. >> >> Other logistical issues will also need to be discussed, such as which >> video system to use (I firmly believe that audio-only participation >> will not be enough), how to get access to it, etc. >> >> Rich -- maybe you can talk about the issues surrounding virtual >> attendance at Santorini and/or in Chicago? >> >> >> >> On Sep 20, 2011, at 9:52 AM, Jeff Hammond wrote: >> >>> what if digital attendance was only permitted by parties who were >>> already voting-eligible? that way, organizations with limited travel >>> funds could attend >50% of meetings in-person but still vote in the >>> remainder. for example, if you have to earn eligibility the >>> old-fashioned way (physical attendance), it immediately eliminates >> all >>> the flakes from the digital attendance pool. >>> >>> anyways, video telecons are still a pain in the arse no matter who is >>> showing up that way. >>> >>> jeff >>> >>> On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 8:33 AM, Jeff Squyres <jsquyres(a)cisco.com> >> wrote: >>>> On Sep 20, 2011, at 9:27 AM, Jeff Hammond wrote: >>>> >>>>> I wonder at what point the MPI Forum will support digital >> attendance. >>>>> I guess someone must have looked into this and decided that it was >> too >>>>> much of pain in the arse. >>>> >>>> That has been the conclusion in the past -- plus, the Forum >> intentionally wanted to "raise the bar" for participation, trying to >> ensure that only those who really cared would actually be involved. >> This prevents (at least) two kinds of lazy participants: >>>> >>>> - those who only want their organization's name on the MPI roster >>>> - those who only attend occasional meetings (or worse, just a >> session or two here and there) and don't really have a good >> understanding of the Forum or the issues involved >>>> >>>> To be clear, Forum participation is open to anyone. But we really >> only want people who want to actually be *involved* -- not just someone >> who drops in for an occasional meeting and is (perhaps unintentionally) >> disruptive due to lack of knowledge/experience on how the Forum works, >> the body of complex issues that are being worked on, etc. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Jeff Squyres >>>> jsquyres(a)cisco.com >>>> For corporate legal information go to: >>>> http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/ >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> mpi-forum mailing list >>>> mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org >>>> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Jeff Hammond >>> Argonne Leadership Computing Facility >>> University of Chicago Computation Institute >>> jhammond(a)alcf.anl.gov / (630) 252-5381 >>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/jeffhammond >>> https://wiki.alcf.anl.gov/index.php/User:Jhammond >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> mpi-forum mailing list >>> mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org >>> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum >> >> >> -- >> Jeff Squyres >> jsquyres(a)cisco.com >> For corporate legal information go to: >> http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/ >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> mpi-forum mailing list >> mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org >> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum > > _______________________________________________ > mpi-forum mailing list > mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum -- Jeff Squyres jsquyres(a)cisco.com For corporate legal information go to: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/

1 0

Re: [Mpi-forum] Meeting schedule for 2012
by Underwood, Keith D 20 Sep '11

20 Sep '11

It would help if somebody knew the state of the art for telepresence. Any inputs? My best understanding is that there are really good solutions for "some to some" interactions, but that the "some to many" problem isn't solved. And, the "some to some" solutions seem to require a preconfigured room. But, it is largely irrelevant: the 8 hour time difference from Japan to pacific and 11 hours from Japan to eastern is likely to be the actual prohibitive item for either far east participation in US based meetings or US participation in far east meetings. It only leaves you a few hours a day that are rational for participation. Europe to the US is not quite as bad, but still a significant challenge. Keith > -----Original Message----- > From: mpi-forum-bounces(a)lists.mpi-forum.org [mailto:mpi-forum- > bounces(a)lists.mpi-forum.org] On Behalf Of Jeff Squyres > Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2011 6:59 AM > To: Main MPI Forum mailing list > Subject: Re: [Mpi-forum] Meeting schedule for 2012 > > This is a good starting point for the discussion. > > Other logistical issues will also need to be discussed, such as which > video system to use (I firmly believe that audio-only participation > will not be enough), how to get access to it, etc. > > Rich -- maybe you can talk about the issues surrounding virtual > attendance at Santorini and/or in Chicago? > > > > On Sep 20, 2011, at 9:52 AM, Jeff Hammond wrote: > > > what if digital attendance was only permitted by parties who were > > already voting-eligible? that way, organizations with limited travel > > funds could attend >50% of meetings in-person but still vote in the > > remainder. for example, if you have to earn eligibility the > > old-fashioned way (physical attendance), it immediately eliminates > all > > the flakes from the digital attendance pool. > > > > anyways, video telecons are still a pain in the arse no matter who is > > showing up that way. > > > > jeff > > > > On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 8:33 AM, Jeff Squyres <jsquyres(a)cisco.com> > wrote: > >> On Sep 20, 2011, at 9:27 AM, Jeff Hammond wrote: > >> > >>> I wonder at what point the MPI Forum will support digital > attendance. > >>> I guess someone must have looked into this and decided that it was > too > >>> much of pain in the arse. > >> > >> That has been the conclusion in the past -- plus, the Forum > intentionally wanted to "raise the bar" for participation, trying to > ensure that only those who really cared would actually be involved. > This prevents (at least) two kinds of lazy participants: > >> > >> - those who only want their organization's name on the MPI roster > >> - those who only attend occasional meetings (or worse, just a > session or two here and there) and don't really have a good > understanding of the Forum or the issues involved > >> > >> To be clear, Forum participation is open to anyone. But we really > only want people who want to actually be *involved* -- not just someone > who drops in for an occasional meeting and is (perhaps unintentionally) > disruptive due to lack of knowledge/experience on how the Forum works, > the body of complex issues that are being worked on, etc. > >> > >> -- > >> Jeff Squyres > >> jsquyres(a)cisco.com > >> For corporate legal information go to: > >> http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/ > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> mpi-forum mailing list > >> mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > >> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Jeff Hammond > > Argonne Leadership Computing Facility > > University of Chicago Computation Institute > > jhammond(a)alcf.anl.gov / (630) 252-5381 > > http://www.linkedin.com/in/jeffhammond > > https://wiki.alcf.anl.gov/index.php/User:Jhammond > > > > _______________________________________________ > > mpi-forum mailing list > > mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum > > > -- > Jeff Squyres > jsquyres(a)cisco.com > For corporate legal information go to: > http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/ > > > _______________________________________________ > mpi-forum mailing list > mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum

1 0

Re: [Mpi-forum] Meeting schedule for 2012
by William Gropp 20 Sep '11

20 Sep '11

I'll note that we did something like this for the 2009 meeting in Helsinki, for exactly this reason. We should also remember that while that worked well enough for a vote, it wasn't a substitute for being present for the discussions. Bill On Sep 20, 2011, at 8:59 AM, Jeff Squyres wrote: > This is a good starting point for the discussion. > > Other logistical issues will also need to be discussed, such as > which video system to use (I firmly believe that audio-only > participation will not be enough), how to get access to it, etc. > > Rich -- maybe you can talk about the issues surrounding virtual > attendance at Santorini and/or in Chicago? > > > > On Sep 20, 2011, at 9:52 AM, Jeff Hammond wrote: > >> what if digital attendance was only permitted by parties who were >> already voting-eligible? that way, organizations with limited travel >> funds could attend >50% of meetings in-person but still vote in the >> remainder. for example, if you have to earn eligibility the >> old-fashioned way (physical attendance), it immediately eliminates >> all >> the flakes from the digital attendance pool. >> >> anyways, video telecons are still a pain in the arse no matter who is >> showing up that way. >> >> jeff >> >> On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 8:33 AM, Jeff Squyres <jsquyres(a)cisco.com> >> wrote: >>> On Sep 20, 2011, at 9:27 AM, Jeff Hammond wrote: >>> >>>> I wonder at what point the MPI Forum will support digital >>>> attendance. >>>> I guess someone must have looked into this and decided that it >>>> was too >>>> much of pain in the arse. >>> >>> That has been the conclusion in the past -- plus, the Forum >>> intentionally wanted to "raise the bar" for participation, trying >>> to ensure that only those who really cared would actually be >>> involved. This prevents (at least) two kinds of lazy participants: >>> >>> - those who only want their organization's name on the MPI roster >>> - those who only attend occasional meetings (or worse, just a >>> session or two here and there) and don't really have a good >>> understanding of the Forum or the issues involved >>> >>> To be clear, Forum participation is open to anyone. But we really >>> only want people who want to actually be *involved* -- not just >>> someone who drops in for an occasional meeting and is (perhaps >>> unintentionally) disruptive due to lack of knowledge/experience on >>> how the Forum works, the body of complex issues that are being >>> worked on, etc. >>> >>> -- >>> Jeff Squyres >>> jsquyres(a)cisco.com >>> For corporate legal information go to: >>> http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/ >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> mpi-forum mailing list >>> mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org >>> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Jeff Hammond >> Argonne Leadership Computing Facility >> University of Chicago Computation Institute >> jhammond(a)alcf.anl.gov / (630) 252-5381 >> http://www.linkedin.com/in/jeffhammond >> https://wiki.alcf.anl.gov/index.php/User:Jhammond >> >> _______________________________________________ >> mpi-forum mailing list >> mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org >> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum > > > -- > Jeff Squyres > jsquyres(a)cisco.com > For corporate legal information go to: > http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/ > > > _______________________________________________ > mpi-forum mailing list > mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum William Gropp Director, Parallel Computing Institute Deputy Director for Research Institute for Advanced Computing Applications and Technologies Paul and Cynthia Saylor Professor of Computer Science University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign

1 0

Re: [Mpi-forum] Meeting schedule for 2012
by TERRY DONTJE 20 Sep '11

20 Sep '11

I am in the same boat as Jeff in that it is very doubtful that I will be able to attend a meeting in Asia. --td On 9/20/2011 9:18 AM, Jeff Squyres wrote: > It does seem fair, but it will likely mean that I will be unable to attend. > > ----- > > Sidenote: Should we start investigating virtual presence technology? There would need to be discussion of a) how to attend, and b) what exactly it would mean (voting-wise) to attend virtually. E.g., you would only count as having "attended" virtually if you actually attend/participate in over half the sessions, or somesuch. > > > On Sep 19, 2011, at 7:06 AM, Graham, Richard L. wrote: > >> I recently had a request to broaden the meeting site location to include one meeting in the far east - specifically in Japan. This request seems reasonable to me, since we have had regular attendance from Japan over the last four years, and as a way to increase involvement from the CS community in east Asia. Therefore, I am inclined to move the May, 2012 meeting from the CA bay area to Japan. Please let me know what you think. I know this will make it more difficult for folks from the US to attend, but it seems only fair to include this geographic area in the meeting schedule. >> >> Rich >> _______________________________________________ >> mpi-forum mailing list >> mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org >> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum > -- Oracle Terry D. Dontje | Principal Software Engineer Developer Tools Engineering | +1.781.442.2631 Oracle *- Performance Technologies* 95 Network Drive, Burlington, MA 01803 Email terry.dontje(a)oracle.com <mailto:[email protected]>

1 0

Re: [Mpi-forum] Meeting schedule for 2012
by Jeff Squyres 20 Sep '11

20 Sep '11

This is a good starting point for the discussion. Other logistical issues will also need to be discussed, such as which video system to use (I firmly believe that audio-only participation will not be enough), how to get access to it, etc. Rich -- maybe you can talk about the issues surrounding virtual attendance at Santorini and/or in Chicago? On Sep 20, 2011, at 9:52 AM, Jeff Hammond wrote: > what if digital attendance was only permitted by parties who were > already voting-eligible? that way, organizations with limited travel > funds could attend >50% of meetings in-person but still vote in the > remainder. for example, if you have to earn eligibility the > old-fashioned way (physical attendance), it immediately eliminates all > the flakes from the digital attendance pool. > > anyways, video telecons are still a pain in the arse no matter who is > showing up that way. > > jeff > > On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 8:33 AM, Jeff Squyres <jsquyres(a)cisco.com> wrote: >> On Sep 20, 2011, at 9:27 AM, Jeff Hammond wrote: >> >>> I wonder at what point the MPI Forum will support digital attendance. >>> I guess someone must have looked into this and decided that it was too >>> much of pain in the arse. >> >> That has been the conclusion in the past -- plus, the Forum intentionally wanted to "raise the bar" for participation, trying to ensure that only those who really cared would actually be involved. This prevents (at least) two kinds of lazy participants: >> >> - those who only want their organization's name on the MPI roster >> - those who only attend occasional meetings (or worse, just a session or two here and there) and don't really have a good understanding of the Forum or the issues involved >> >> To be clear, Forum participation is open to anyone. But we really only want people who want to actually be *involved* -- not just someone who drops in for an occasional meeting and is (perhaps unintentionally) disruptive due to lack of knowledge/experience on how the Forum works, the body of complex issues that are being worked on, etc. >> >> -- >> Jeff Squyres >> jsquyres(a)cisco.com >> For corporate legal information go to: >> http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/ >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> mpi-forum mailing list >> mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org >> http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum >> > > > > -- > Jeff Hammond > Argonne Leadership Computing Facility > University of Chicago Computation Institute > jhammond(a)alcf.anl.gov / (630) 252-5381 > http://www.linkedin.com/in/jeffhammond > https://wiki.alcf.anl.gov/index.php/User:Jhammond > > _______________________________________________ > mpi-forum mailing list > mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum -- Jeff Squyres jsquyres(a)cisco.com For corporate legal information go to: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/

1 0

Re: [Mpi-forum] Meeting schedule for 2012
by Jeff Hammond 20 Sep '11

20 Sep '11

what if digital attendance was only permitted by parties who were already voting-eligible? that way, organizations with limited travel funds could attend >50% of meetings in-person but still vote in the remainder. for example, if you have to earn eligibility the old-fashioned way (physical attendance), it immediately eliminates all the flakes from the digital attendance pool. anyways, video telecons are still a pain in the arse no matter who is showing up that way. jeff On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 8:33 AM, Jeff Squyres <jsquyres(a)cisco.com> wrote: > On Sep 20, 2011, at 9:27 AM, Jeff Hammond wrote: > >> I wonder at what point the MPI Forum will support digital attendance. >> I guess someone must have looked into this and decided that it was too >> much of pain in the arse. > > That has been the conclusion in the past -- plus, the Forum intentionally wanted to "raise the bar" for participation, trying to ensure that only those who really cared would actually be involved. ï¿½This prevents (at least) two kinds of lazy participants: > > - those who only want their organization's name on the MPI roster > - those who only attend occasional meetings (or worse, just a session or two here and there) and don't really have a good understanding of the Forum or the issues involved > > To be clear, Forum participation is open to anyone. ï¿½But we really only want people who want to actually be *involved* -- not just someone who drops in for an occasional meeting and is (perhaps unintentionally) disruptive due to lack of knowledge/experience on how the Forum works, the body of complex issues that are being worked on, etc. > > -- > Jeff Squyres > jsquyres(a)cisco.com > For corporate legal information go to: > http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/ > > > _______________________________________________ > mpi-forum mailing list > mpi-forum(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi-forum > -- Jeff Hammond Argonne Leadership Computing Facility University of Chicago Computation Institute jhammond(a)alcf.anl.gov / (630) 252-5381 http://www.linkedin.com/in/jeffhammond https://wiki.alcf.anl.gov/index.php/User:Jhammond

1 0

Re: [Mpi-forum] Santorini voting eligibility
by Jeff Squyres 20 Sep '11

20 Sep '11

I'm so sorry; this is a typo in my email. I have it correct on the worksheet. Thanks for the correction! On Sep 20, 2011, at 9:46 AM, Yutaka Ishikawa wrote: > Jeff, > >> - Riken ACS > The correct acronym is > Riken AICS > (Advanced Institte for Computational Science) > > Regards, > Yutaka -- Jeff Squyres jsquyres(a)cisco.com For corporate legal information go to: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/

1 0