Open MPI logo

Open MPI Development Mailing List Archives

  |   Home   |   Support   |   FAQ   |  

This web mail archive is frozen.

This page is part of a frozen web archive of this mailing list.

You can still navigate around this archive, but know that no new mails have been added to it since July of 2016.

Click here to be taken to the new web archives of this list; it includes all the mails that are in this frozen archive plus all new mails that have been sent to the list since it was migrated to the new archives.

Subject: Re: [OMPI devel] [RFC] Move the datatype engine in the OPAL layer
From: Jeff Squyres (jsquyres_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-07-14 11:39:59


I'm a bit disturbed by two things:

1. My questions were not answered before the DDT split was merged to
the trunk.

2. The number of "fixup" commits and things that broke on the trunk
after the DDT split was merged seem to indicate a lack of testing.
What happened?

(perhaps this was addressed on the teleconf today; I was not there --
if it was discussed, forgive the redundancy...)

On Jul 9, 2009, at 7:08 AM, Jeff Squyres wrote:

> Two comments:
>
>> Why : ... Second
>> reason, is that now the data-type engine (without all the MPI
>> knowledge) is available to other projects.
>>
>
> We're still only shipping Open MPI as a whole as our official
> product, right? More specifically: we're not intending to ship OPAL
> independently, right? If other projects want to pick up OPAL
> themselves and use it (e.g., via SVN checkouts, Mercurial clones,
> official OMPI tarballs, etc.), that's fine. But I'd be opposed to
> creating a 2nd official distribution that was OPAL-only.
>
>> Performance tests on the ompi-ddt branch have proven that there is no
>> performance penalties associated with this change (tests done using
>> NetPipe-3.7.1 on smoky using BTL/sm, giving 1.6usecs on this
>> platform).
>>
>
>
> 1.6us sounds like pretty high sm latency... Is this a slow platform?
>
> --
> Jeff Squyres
> Cisco Systems
>

-- 
Jeff Squyres
Cisco Systems