Open MPI logo

Open MPI User's 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 users] Anyscientific application heavily using MPI_Barrier?
From: Eugene Loh (Eugene.Loh_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-08-24 18:43:11


Richard Treumann wrote:

Guess I should have kept quiet a bit longer. As I recall we had already seen a counter example to Jeff's stronger statement and that motivated my narrower one.

          If there are no wildcard receives - every MPI_Barrier call is semantically irrelevant.
Do you have a counter example for my more cautious assertion?
No, but my momentary interest included wildcards, and it seemed to me that, as a corollary to your claim, that if there are wildcards, then Barriers could be relevent.  And my example was "proof by demonstration".
( I had already granted that a correct MPI program could be made incorrect with a barrier and the barrier that broke it would have to be considered be "semantically relevant". I would reword the statement with that in mind if I were to offer it up again. )