There is a branch named cartesian with a tentative implementation/test.
Since that does not fall in the bugfix category, I'd like to have some
opinion about it before pushing on the develop branch.
Any comment welcomed but there are two point for which I would
specifically appreciate some input:
- As for the topology description, the C api does it through two
separate int arrays, one for the dimensions and one for the periodicity
(which must be of the same size obviously). I choose to do it through
one single array of pod struct { int size; bool periodic;} since I
though it made to association betwen size and periodicity cleared and
reduced the risk of a array size mismatch. But it does make two more
classes.
- One could imagine to add a templatized version that would fix the
number of dimension at compile time, but I could not convince myself of
the relevance of such a class. In the use cases I could think of, it
wasn't clear that the benefit out-weighted the add complexity.
Nite that there is not mapping for shift yet, since it seems to be used
with sendrecv for which there is no mapping yet.
Enjoy (well sort of)
Alain
On 10/09/2014 13:53, Alain Miniussi wrote:
On 03/09/2014 13:27, Hal Finkel wrote:
Alain,
I believe it would be useful to support the Cartesian communicators,
it is just that no one has done the development work. Please feel
free to rectify that shortcoming :-)
Ok, I'll look into it.
Right now I have a few issues that shows up with Intel's MPI that
makes the non-blocking test fail (hang actually).
I made 3 pull requests related to those.
I'll try starting working on cartesian once they're fixed since I'd
like to have all the test passing on my development machine before that.
Alain
-Hal
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alain Miniussi" <alain.miniu...@oca.eu>
To: boost-mpi@lists.boost.org
Sent: Wednesday, September 3, 2014 3:44:03 AM
Subject: [Boost-mpi] cartesian ecomposion
Hi
The Cartesian decomposition part of the MPI spec does not seems to be
present in boost mpi.
Is it just due to a lack of resources or is it useless for some
reason ?
I'd like to look into it but would like to make sure there is a
point.
Best regards
Alain
_______________________________________________
Boost-mpi mailing list
Boost-mpi@lists.boost.org
http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-mpi
--
---
Alain
_______________________________________________
Boost-mpi mailing list
Boost-mpi@lists.boost.org
http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-mpi
