Since it is not collective, the names can get out of sync, even with "reasonable" usage. Consider a case where rank 0 views a serial Vec (say with the Matlab viewer), and then a parallel Vec (e.g. to HDF5). The result would either be deadlock (with collective IO) or a file where Vec_0 contains all but rank 0's part, and Vec_1 contains only rank 0's part (and an HDF5 error once another vector is viewed because the Vec_1 dataspace cannot be created if it already exists).
Is it reasonable to make PetscObjectName (and necessary dependents) collective where it performs this? MPI_Allreduce(MPI_IN_PLACE,&counter,1,MPI_INT,MPI_MAX,obj->comm); Jed -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 261 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-dev/attachments/20091116/43924e94/attachment.pgp>
