On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 10:22 AM, Bill Hart<[email protected]> wrote:
> That is an interesting question. pthreads is certainly available on > much older compilers. But the issue is, it is very hard to code. I guess it is the only thing I know, so maybe I should move to OpenMP. ;-) > I'd be interested in supporting pthreads if there was some performance > benefit from doing so, but I actually think OpenMP is pretty good. > > I recall when parallelising using pthreads problems with about 500x500 > = 250000 bits of data, or perhaps a little less, could be effectively > parallelised. We are currently parallelising stuff effectively with > 128000 bits of data. > > In other words, there doesn't seem to be any immediately obvious > performance reason to consider pthreads. >From a performance perspective, I have no idea. I was thinking more from a support perspective. Pthreads is available on every system under the sun (except MSVC natively). I haven't looked lately but do any compilers come with OpenMP support built-in? I'm not sure how easy it will be to get OpenMP working in MSVC (which doesn't really support pthreads either so might have to make a Windows threads version anyways). If OpenMP is widely supported now then it would probably make more sense just to support one, the one that is easier. Jeff. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "mpir-devel" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mpir-devel?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
