- mpiwg-persistence - mailman3.cels.anl.gov

Re: [mpiwg-persistence] [mpi-forum/mpi-standard] Persistent collectives 2017 (#29)
by Anthony Skjellum 29 Nov '17

29 Nov '17

Can this be a "ticket 0" change? On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 2:56 PM, Martin Schulz <gu58niw(a)mytum.de> wrote: > Hi Dan, all, > > Just my personal view: the that’s how I always interpreted the statement > anyway, but I can see how this could be misinterpreted. Hence, adding the > clarification is IMHO a good move. > > Just my 2c, > > Martin > > > On 29. Nov 2017, at 11:07, HOLMES Daniel <d.holmes(a)epcc.ed.ac.uk> wrote: > > Hi Persistence WG members, > > We have a suggested change to the wording of the MPI Standard text that we > will propose to the MPI Forum next week regarding persistent collective > operations. > > Once initialized, > persistent collective operations can be started in any order > independently of initialization order > +and the order can differ among ranks in the communicator > > > Most of this sentence already appears in our proposed text - the > suggestion is to add the line beginning with “+”. > > I think this is a good suggestion - we should make this point absolutely > clear. We should word-smith the exact phrase (e.g. during the meeting later > today?) and then include it in our formal reading next week by holding a > “no-no” vote. > > Cheers, > Dan. > > Begin forwarded message: > > *From: *KAWASHIMA Takahiro <notifications(a)github.com> > *Subject: **Re: [mpi-forum/mpi-standard] Persistent collectives 2017 > (#29)* > *Date: *29 November 2017 at 06:09:20 GMT > *To: *mpi-forum/mpi-standard <mpi-standard(a)noreply.github.com> > *Cc: *Dan Holmes <dholmes(a)epcc.ed.ac.uk>, Mention < > mention(a)noreply.github.com> > *Reply-To: *mpi-forum/mpi-standard <reply+00c7fc4ac57b95d8d1ec9f08428087 > 76a6bf83a41aa2b15e92cf000000011636110f92a169ce0dd58755(a)reply.github.com> > > @dholmes-epcc-ed-ac-uk <https://github.com/dholmes-epcc-ed-ac-uk>, > With the existing text, I think many people can understand that it is > saying (at least) "*requests can be started using MPI_START or > MPI_STARTALL in any order independently of initialization order*", > because of analogy to the point-to-point communication. So I think your > suggested text is unnecessary. > But some people may *not* understand that it is also saying "*the order > of starting requests can differ among ranks in the communicator*", > because (1) the matching rule for persistent collective operations is > different from the matching rule for point-to-point communication so that > analogy to the point-to-point communication is not applied and (2) the > order of nonblocking collective calls must be same among ranks in the > communicator. > > How about the sentence below? I'm not good at English. Please correct it > if it is not good. > > Once initialized, > persistent collective operations can be started in any order > independently of initialization order > and the order can differ among ranks in the communicator > > If anyone else thinks the existing text is sufficient, I won't request the > change. Probably my English reading skill is low. > > — > You are receiving this because you were mentioned. > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub > <https://github.com/mpi-forum/mpi-standard/pull/29#issuecomment-347762876>, > or mute the thread > <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AMf8SiG0KfwGmYxNhaFoTBv_J…> > . > > > The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in > Scotland, with registration number SC005336. > _______________________________________________ > mpiwg-persistence mailing list > mpiwg-persistence(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > https://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo/mpiwg-persistence > > > > _______________________________________________ > mpiwg-persistence mailing list > mpiwg-persistence(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > https://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo/mpiwg-persistence > > -- Anthony Skjellum, PhD skjellum(a)gmail.com Cell: +1-205-807-4968

1 0

Re: [mpiwg-persistence] [mpi-forum/mpi-standard] Persistent collectives 2017 (#29)
by Anthony Skjellum 29 Nov '17

29 Nov '17

This is a good suggestion, agreed. On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 5:07 AM, HOLMES Daniel <d.holmes(a)epcc.ed.ac.uk> wrote: > Hi Persistence WG members, > > We have a suggested change to the wording of the MPI Standard text that we > will propose to the MPI Forum next week regarding persistent collective > operations. > > Once initialized, > persistent collective operations can be started in any order > independently of initialization order > +and the order can differ among ranks in the communicator > > > Most of this sentence already appears in our proposed text - the > suggestion is to add the line beginning with “+”. > > I think this is a good suggestion - we should make this point absolutely > clear. We should word-smith the exact phrase (e.g. during the meeting later > today?) and then include it in our formal reading next week by holding a > “no-no” vote. > > Cheers, > Dan. > > Begin forwarded message: > > *From: *KAWASHIMA Takahiro <notifications(a)github.com> > *Subject: **Re: [mpi-forum/mpi-standard] Persistent collectives 2017 > (#29)* > *Date: *29 November 2017 at 06:09:20 GMT > *To: *mpi-forum/mpi-standard <mpi-standard(a)noreply.github.com> > *Cc: *Dan Holmes <dholmes(a)epcc.ed.ac.uk>, Mention < > mention(a)noreply.github.com> > *Reply-To: *mpi-forum/mpi-standard <reply+00c7fc4ac57b95d8d1ec9f08428087 > 76a6bf83a41aa2b15e92cf000000011636110f92a169ce0dd58755(a)reply.github.com> > > @dholmes-epcc-ed-ac-uk <https://github.com/dholmes-epcc-ed-ac-uk>, > With the existing text, I think many people can understand that it is > saying (at least) "*requests can be started using MPI_START or > MPI_STARTALL in any order independently of initialization order*", > because of analogy to the point-to-point communication. So I think your > suggested text is unnecessary. > But some people may *not* understand that it is also saying "*the order > of starting requests can differ among ranks in the communicator*", > because (1) the matching rule for persistent collective operations is > different from the matching rule for point-to-point communication so that > analogy to the point-to-point communication is not applied and (2) the > order of nonblocking collective calls must be same among ranks in the > communicator. > > How about the sentence below? I'm not good at English. Please correct it > if it is not good. > > Once initialized, > persistent collective operations can be started in any order > independently of initialization order > and the order can differ among ranks in the communicator > > If anyone else thinks the existing text is sufficient, I won't request the > change. Probably my English reading skill is low. > > — > You are receiving this because you were mentioned. > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub > <https://github.com/mpi-forum/mpi-standard/pull/29#issuecomment-347762876>, > or mute the thread > <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AMf8SiG0KfwGmYxNhaFoTBv_J…> > . > > > > The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in > Scotland, with registration number SC005336. > > -- Anthony Skjellum, PhD skjellum(a)gmail.com Cell: +1-205-807-4968

1 0

Re: [mpiwg-persistence] [mpi-forum/mpi-standard] Persistent collectives 2017 (#29)
by Martin Schulz 29 Nov '17

29 Nov '17

Hi Dan, all, Just my personal view: the that’s how I always interpreted the statement anyway, but I can see how this could be misinterpreted. Hence, adding the clarification is IMHO a good move. Just my 2c, Martin > On 29. Nov 2017, at 11:07, HOLMES Daniel <d.holmes(a)epcc.ed.ac.uk> wrote: > > Hi Persistence WG members, > > We have a suggested change to the wording of the MPI Standard text that we will propose to the MPI Forum next week regarding persistent collective operations. > >> Once initialized, >> persistent collective operations can be started in any order >> independently of initialization order >> +and the order can differ among ranks in the communicator > > Most of this sentence already appears in our proposed text - the suggestion is to add the line beginning with “+”. > > I think this is a good suggestion - we should make this point absolutely clear. We should word-smith the exact phrase (e.g. during the meeting later today?) and then include it in our formal reading next week by holding a “no-no” vote. > > Cheers, > Dan. > >> Begin forwarded message: >> >> From: KAWASHIMA Takahiro <notifications(a)github.com <mailto:[email protected]>> >> Subject: Re: [mpi-forum/mpi-standard] Persistent collectives 2017 (#29) >> Date: 29 November 2017 at 06:09:20 GMT >> To: mpi-forum/mpi-standard <mpi-standard(a)noreply.github.com <mailto:[email protected]>> >> Cc: Dan Holmes <dholmes(a)epcc.ed.ac.uk <mailto:[email protected]>>, Mention <mention(a)noreply.github.com <mailto:[email protected]>> >> Reply-To: mpi-forum/mpi-standard <reply+00c7fc4ac57b95d8d1ec9f0842808776a6bf83a41aa2b15e92cf000000011636110f92a169ce0dd58755(a)reply.github.com <mailto:reply+00c7fc4ac57b95d8d1ec9f0842808776a6bf83a41aa2b15e92cf000000011636110f92a169ce0dd58755@reply.github.com>> >> >> @dholmes-epcc-ed-ac-uk <https://github.com/dholmes-epcc-ed-ac-uk>, >> With the existing text, I think many people can understand that it is saying (at least) "requests can be started using MPI_START or MPI_STARTALL in any order independently of initialization order", because of analogy to the point-to-point communication. So I think your suggested text is unnecessary. >> But some people may not understand that it is also saying "the order of starting requests can differ among ranks in the communicator", because (1) the matching rule for persistent collective operations is different from the matching rule for point-to-point communication so that analogy to the point-to-point communication is not applied and (2) the order of nonblocking collective calls must be same among ranks in the communicator. >> >> How about the sentence below? I'm not good at English. Please correct it if it is not good. >> >> Once initialized, >> persistent collective operations can be started in any order >> independently of initialization order >> and the order can differ among ranks in the communicator >> >> If anyone else thinks the existing text is sufficient, I won't request the change. Probably my English reading skill is low. >> >> — >> You are receiving this because you were mentioned. >> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <https://github.com/mpi-forum/mpi-standard/pull/29#issuecomment-347762876>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AMf8SiG0KfwGmYxNhaFoTBv_J…>. >> > > The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in > Scotland, with registration number SC005336. > _______________________________________________ > mpiwg-persistence mailing list > mpiwg-persistence(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > https://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo/mpiwg-persistence

1 0

Fwd: [mpi-forum/mpi-standard] Persistent collectives 2017 (#29)
by HOLMES Daniel 29 Nov '17

29 Nov '17

Hi Persistence WG members, We have a suggested change to the wording of the MPI Standard text that we will propose to the MPI Forum next week regarding persistent collective operations. Once initialized, persistent collective operations can be started in any order independently of initialization order +and the order can differ among ranks in the communicator Most of this sentence already appears in our proposed text - the suggestion is to add the line beginning with “+”. I think this is a good suggestion - we should make this point absolutely clear. We should word-smith the exact phrase (e.g. during the meeting later today?) and then include it in our formal reading next week by holding a “no-no” vote. Cheers, Dan. Begin forwarded message: From: KAWASHIMA Takahiro <notifications(a)github.com<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: Re: [mpi-forum/mpi-standard] Persistent collectives 2017 (#29) Date: 29 November 2017 at 06:09:20 GMT To: mpi-forum/mpi-standard <mpi-standard(a)noreply.github.com<mailto:[email protected]>> Cc: Dan Holmes <dholmes(a)epcc.ed.ac.uk<mailto:[email protected]>>, Mention <mention(a)noreply.github.com<mailto:[email protected]>> Reply-To: mpi-forum/mpi-standard <reply+00c7fc4ac57b95d8d1ec9f0842808776a6bf83a41aa2b15e92cf000000011636110f92a169ce0dd58755(a)reply.github.com<mailto:reply+00c7fc4ac57b95d8d1ec9f0842808776a6bf83a41aa2b15e92cf000000011636110f92a169ce0dd58755@reply.github.com>> @dholmes-epcc-ed-ac-uk<https://github.com/dholmes-epcc-ed-ac-uk>, With the existing text, I think many people can understand that it is saying (at least) "requests can be started using MPI_START or MPI_STARTALL in any order independently of initialization order", because of analogy to the point-to-point communication. So I think your suggested text is unnecessary. But some people may not understand that it is also saying "the order of starting requests can differ among ranks in the communicator", because (1) the matching rule for persistent collective operations is different from the matching rule for point-to-point communication so that analogy to the point-to-point communication is not applied and (2) the order of nonblocking collective calls must be same among ranks in the communicator. How about the sentence below? I'm not good at English. Please correct it if it is not good. Once initialized, persistent collective operations can be started in any order independently of initialization order and the order can differ among ranks in the communicator If anyone else thinks the existing text is sufficient, I won't request the change. Probably my English reading skill is low. — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<https://github.com/mpi-forum/mpi-standard/pull/29#issuecomment-347762876>, or mute the thread<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AMf8SiG0KfwGmYxNhaFoTBv_J…>. The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in Scotland, with registration number SC005336.

1 0

Re: [mpiwg-persistence] Freeing collective requests
by Anthony Skjellum 17 Nov '17

17 Nov '17

Dan, thanks for doing all this hard work. I agree will read the whole proposal, and the document is a diff against MPI 3.1, so we will not be hiding anything from the baseline :-) I will review this weekend, but I am going to announce the reading now. Thanks, Tony On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 4:00 PM, HOLMES Daniel <d.holmes(a)epcc.ed.ac.uk> wrote: > Hi all, > > I have added a clarification to the point-to-point chapter (where > MPI_REQUEST_FREE is defined) to state that collective requests must not be > freed while they are active. > > I have pushed these changes to Github and produced a new PDF of the MPI > Standard (attached to comments on both the issue and the pull request). > I have added a comment in Github (on both the issue and the pull request) > summarising the current thinking regarding “collective free” semantics and > “block until really deallocated” semantics. > > Useful links: > https://github.com/mpi-forum/mpi-issues/issues/25 > https://github.com/mpi-forum/mpi-standard/pull/29 > https://github.com/mpi-forum/mpi-standard/files/1483740/mpi32-report.pdf > > I think this means we are ready for the next face-to-face MPI Forum > meeting. > > We made quite a few small changes since the version announced for the last > meeting. We should re-read the whole proposal, rather than try to get away > with a “no no vote” followed by a 1st vote. > > If there are other tasks to complete before we announce our reading > (deadline Monday 20th Nov), please let me know by replying to this email > list ASAP. > > Cheers, > Dan. > > The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in > Scotland, with registration number SC005336. > > _______________________________________________ > mpiwg-persistence mailing list > mpiwg-persistence(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > https://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo/mpiwg-persistence > > -- Anthony Skjellum, PhD skjellum(a)gmail.com Cell: +1-205-807-4968

1 0

Freeing collective requests
by HOLMES Daniel 17 Nov '17

17 Nov '17

Hi all, I have added a clarification to the point-to-point chapter (where MPI_REQUEST_FREE is defined) to state that collective requests must not be freed while they are active. I have pushed these changes to Github and produced a new PDF of the MPI Standard (attached to comments on both the issue and the pull request). I have added a comment in Github (on both the issue and the pull request) summarising the current thinking regarding “collective free” semantics and “block until really deallocated” semantics. Useful links: https://github.com/mpi-forum/mpi-issues/issues/25 https://github.com/mpi-forum/mpi-standard/pull/29 https://github.com/mpi-forum/mpi-standard/files/1483740/mpi32-report.pdf I think this means we are ready for the next face-to-face MPI Forum meeting. We made quite a few small changes since the version announced for the last meeting. We should re-read the whole proposal, rather than try to get away with a “no no vote” followed by a 1st vote. If there are other tasks to complete before we announce our reading (deadline Monday 20th Nov), please let me know by replying to this email list ASAP. Cheers, Dan. The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in Scotland, with registration number SC005336.

1 0

Re: [mpiwg-persistence] Next meeting - today - at 8am Central US
by Anthony Skjellum 08 Nov '17

08 Nov '17

Could we just do the meeting tomorrow at 9am eastern, given all the constraints on time and the late start? On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 9:21 AM, HOLMES Daniel <d.holmes(a)epcc.ed.ac.uk> wrote: > Hi all, > > Apologies, I have only just come back from the meeting that was supposed > to finish ages ago. I’ll start the meeting now. > > ──────────────── Please join my meeting from your computer, tablet or > smartphone. https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/357844797 > <https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Fglobal.gotomeeting.com%2Fjoin%2F…> > You can also dial in using your phone. United States: +1 (786) 535-3119 > <(786)%20535-3119> Access Code: 357-844-797 More phone numbers France: > +33 170 950 590 United Kingdom: +44 330 221 0097 <+44%20330%20221%200097> > First GoToMeeting? Let's do a quick system check: > https://link.gotomeeting.com/system-check > <https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Flink.gotomeeting.com%2Fsystem-ch…> > ────────────────────────── > > Cheers, > Dan. > > On 8 Nov 2017, at 15:18, Anthony Skjellum <skjellum(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > I suppose I do not have the latest meeting info. > > On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 6:41 AM, HOLMES Daniel <d.holmes(a)epcc.ed.ac.uk> > wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> We have our next teleconference meeting today in a little over 2 hours' >> time. >> >> Connection details below: >> >> ────────────────────────────────────────── >> Please join my meeting from your computer, tablet or smartphone. >> https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/357844797 >> >> You can also dial in using your phone. >> United States: +1 (786) 535-3119 >> >> Access Code: 357-844-797 >> >> More phone numbers >> France: +33 170 950 590 >> United Kingdom: +44 330 221 0097 >> >> First GoToMeeting? Let's do a quick system check: >> https://link.gotomeeting.com/system-check >> ────────────────────────────────────────── >> >> Cheers, >> Dan. >> -- >> The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in >> Scotland, with registration number SC005336. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> mpiwg-persistence mailing list >> mpiwg-persistence(a)lists.mpi-forum.org >> https://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo/mpiwg-persistence >> >> -- >> The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in >> Scotland, with registration number SC005336. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> mpiwg-persistence mailing list >> mpiwg-persistence(a)lists.mpi-forum.org >> https://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo/mpiwg-persistence >> > > > > -- > Anthony Skjellum, PhD > skjellum(a)gmail.com > Cell: +1-205-807-4968 <(205)%20807-4968> > > > > > The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in > Scotland, with registration number SC005336. > > -- Anthony Skjellum, PhD skjellum(a)gmail.com Cell: +1-205-807-4968

1 0

Re: [mpiwg-persistence] Next meeting - today - at 8am Central US
by HOLMES Daniel 08 Nov '17

08 Nov '17

Hi all, Apologies, I have only just come back from the meeting that was supposed to finish ages ago. I’ll start the meeting now. ──────────────── Please join my meeting from your computer, tablet or smartphone. https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/357844797<https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Fglobal.gotomeeting.com%2Fjoin%2F…> You can also dial in using your phone. United States: +1 (786) 535-3119 Access Code: 357-844-797 More phone numbers France: +33 170 950 590 United Kingdom: +44 330 221 0097 First GoToMeeting? Let's do a quick system check: https://link.gotomeeting.com/system-check<https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Flink.gotomeeting.com%2Fsystem-ch…> ────────────────────────── Cheers, Dan. On 8 Nov 2017, at 15:18, Anthony Skjellum <skjellum(a)gmail.com<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: I suppose I do not have the latest meeting info. On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 6:41 AM, HOLMES Daniel <d.holmes(a)epcc.ed.ac.uk<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Hi all, We have our next teleconference meeting today in a little over 2 hours' time. Connection details below: ────────────────────────────────────────── Please join my meeting from your computer, tablet or smartphone. https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/357844797 You can also dial in using your phone. United States: +1 (786) 535-3119<tel:%2B1%20%28786%29%20535-3119> Access Code: 357-844-797 More phone numbers France: +33 170 950 590<tel:%2B33%20170%20950%20590> United Kingdom: +44 330 221 0097<tel:%2B44%20330%20221%200097> First GoToMeeting? Let's do a quick system check: https://link.gotomeeting.com/system-check ────────────────────────────────────────── Cheers, Dan. -- The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in Scotland, with registration number SC005336. _______________________________________________ mpiwg-persistence mailing list mpiwg-persistence(a)lists.mpi-forum.org<mailto:[email protected]> https://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo/mpiwg-persistence -- The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in Scotland, with registration number SC005336. _______________________________________________ mpiwg-persistence mailing list mpiwg-persistence(a)lists.mpi-forum.org<mailto:[email protected]> https://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo/mpiwg-persistence -- Anthony Skjellum, PhD skjellum(a)gmail.com<mailto:[email protected]> Cell: +1-205-807-4968 The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in Scotland, with registration number SC005336.

1 0

Re: [mpiwg-persistence] Next meeting - today - at 8am Central US
by Anthony Skjellum 08 Nov '17

08 Nov '17

I suppose I do not have the latest meeting info. On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 6:41 AM, HOLMES Daniel <d.holmes(a)epcc.ed.ac.uk> wrote: > Hi all, > > We have our next teleconference meeting today in a little over 2 hours' > time. > > Connection details below: > > ────────────────────────────────────────── > Please join my meeting from your computer, tablet or smartphone. > https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/357844797 > > You can also dial in using your phone. > United States: +1 (786) 535-3119 > > Access Code: 357-844-797 > > More phone numbers > France: +33 170 950 590 > United Kingdom: +44 330 221 0097 > > First GoToMeeting? Let's do a quick system check: > https://link.gotomeeting.com/system-check > ────────────────────────────────────────── > > Cheers, > Dan. > -- > The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in > Scotland, with registration number SC005336. > > _______________________________________________ > mpiwg-persistence mailing list > mpiwg-persistence(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > https://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo/mpiwg-persistence > > -- > The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in > Scotland, with registration number SC005336. > > _______________________________________________ > mpiwg-persistence mailing list > mpiwg-persistence(a)lists.mpi-forum.org > https://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo/mpiwg-persistence > -- Anthony Skjellum, PhD skjellum(a)gmail.com Cell: +1-205-807-4968

1 0

Re: [mpiwg-persistence] Notes from meeting today 25th Oct 2017
by Anthony Skjellum 25 Oct '17

25 Oct '17

Can we do next meeting on nov 2 please I'll respond in detail on these minutes tonight ! Thx Tony Anthony Skjellum, PhD 205-807-4968 On Oct 25, 2017, at 9:44 AM, HOLMES Daniel <d.holmes(a)epcc.ed.ac.uk<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Hi all, Notes from today's meeting: 1) extended version of EuroMPI 2017 "Performance Planning" paper for journal special issue [Dan] add state-machine diagram and various sentences throughout section 3 - emphasise life-cycle difference between blocking/nonblocking cache (must be tied to comm) and persistent cache (can be tied to request). [Puri] change format of paper to Elsevier journal layout [Puri] update CG example to one that gave good results [Srinivas] integrate the reference implementation of persistent collectives into MLSL and run a machine learning application use-case - add plot (if possible) and text to paper in results section - focus on correctness/more-natural programming style, i.e. lack of need to duplicate comm per collective to avoid ordering issues 2) further implementation/optimisation work, aiming at new paper (possible target SC18) [Dan] scope out and begin coding work on infrastructure improvement, initially for MPI_Allreduce_init [Puri] code review and testing of PNBC new code Next meeting: Wed 1st Nov 2017 8am Central US via GoToMeeting. Cheers, Dan. -- The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in Scotland, with registration number SC005336. _______________________________________________ mpiwg-persistence mailing list mpiwg-persistence(a)lists.mpi-forum.org<mailto:[email protected]> https://lists.mpi-forum.org/mailman/listinfo/mpiwg-persistence

1 0