Starting discussion on this proposal at the next forum meeting sounds fine to me. I don't know if we need to devote the whole time to this proposal, but I can prepare a few things for our discussion. I hope to have a basic prototype ready by then too. I can contact Paul Hargrove (BLCR) to see if he would be interested in attending this discussion. Since this proposal is a collective operation, it might be useful to have someone from the collective working group sit in to make sure the proposal is phrased appropriately. Cheers, Josh On Jan 28, 2009, at 10:22 AM, Richard Graham wrote:

Josh, Thanks for sending this around. I would like to schedule a time to start discussion this proposal. To do so, I think we need to have the impacted parties at the table. Since the Evergrid (sp) folks and the BLCR folks are in the Bay area, would it make sense to devote our working group time at the Forum to this subject, and invite then to attend ? Who else would we want to have participate in this discussion ?

Thanks, Rich

On 1/22/09 10:21 AM, "Josh Hursey" <[email protected]> wrote:

...

I have updated the Quiescence Interface proposal on the wiki: https://svn.mpi-forum.org/trac/mpi-forum-web/wiki/Quiescence

I am interested in questions and comments from the group regarding the interface, and use-cases. The primary use-case is for application initiated checkpoint/restart, but the semantics of the proposed API likely also open doors to other use-cases.

Let me know what you think.

Cheers, Josh

_______________________________________________ mpi3-ft mailing list [email protected] http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi3-ft

_______________________________________________ mpi3-ft mailing list [email protected] http://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/mpi3-ft