* Jeffrey Squyres <[email protected]> [2012-04-24 16:52:55]:

On Apr 24, 2012, at 4:24 PM, William Gropp wrote:

...

Yes, an MPI process need not be an OS process, and there is in fact a long history of such implementations, starting (as far as I know) with TMPI. An easy out is to make this optional and only apply when there is such a one-to-one mapping of MPI and OS processes.

That would defeat the use-case that I proposed (tools needing a unique ID for the process). Other options:

- provide a comma-delimited list of MCW ranks in the OS process - provide the lowest (or highest? or median? or ...?) MCW rank in the OS process - ...some other unique value

Any kind of unique value would allow the tool to have a unique, safe filename.

What about a tmpnam for MPI then :-) No need to bring details like rank->thread->process mapping into this if all you want is a guaranteed unique filename among the MPI ranks of the application. Dries