Luis Vitorio Cargnini wrote:
Ok, after all the considerations, I'll try Boost, today, make some
experiments and see if I can use it or if I'll avoid it yet.
But as said by Raimond I think, the problem is been dependent of a
rich-incredible-amazing-toolset but still implementing only
Ok, after all the considerations, I'll try Boost, today, make some
experiments and see if I can use it or if I'll avoid it yet.
But as said by Raimond I think, the problem is been dependent of a
rich-incredible-amazing-toolset but still implementing only
MPI-1, and do not implement
I think you face a common trade-off:
- use a well-established, debugged, abstraction-rich library
- write all of that stuff yourself
FWIW, I think the first one is a no-brainer. There's a reason they
wrote Boost.MPI: it's complex, difficult stuff, and is perfect as
middleware for others to
Hi,
On Mon, Jul 06, 2009 at 03:24:07PM -0400, Luis Vitorio Cargnini wrote:
> Thanks, but I really do not want to use Boost.
> Is easier ? certainly is, but I want to make it using only MPI
> itself
> and not been dependent of a Library, or templates like the majority
> of
> boost a huge set of
> IF boost is attached to MPI 3 (or whatever), AND it becomes part of the
> mainstream MPI implementations, THEN you can have the discussion again.
Hi,
At the moment, I think that Boost.MPI only supports MPI1.1, and even
then, some additional work may be done, at least regarding the complex
Hi Luis,
Luis Vitorio Cargnini wrote:
Your suggestion is a great and interesting idea. I only have the fear to
get used to the Boost and could not get rid of Boost anymore, because
one thing is sure the abstraction added by Boost is impressive, it turn
I should add that I fully
Terry Frankcombe wrote:
I understand Luis' position completely. He wants an MPI program, not a
program that's written in some other environment, no matter how
attractive that may be. It's like the difference between writing a
numerical program in standard-conforming Fortran and writing it in
On Mon, 2009-07-06 at 23:09 -0400, John Phillips wrote:
> Luis Vitorio Cargnini wrote:
> >
> > Your suggestion is a great and interesting idea. I only have the fear to
> > get used to the Boost and could not get rid of Boost anymore, because
> > one thing is sure the abstraction added by Boost
Luis Vitorio Cargnini wrote:
Your suggestion is a great and interesting idea. I only have the fear to
get used to the Boost and could not get rid of Boost anymore, because
one thing is sure the abstraction added by Boost is impressive, it turn
the things much less painful like MPI to be
Luis Vitorio Cargnini wrote:
just one additional and if I have:
vector< vector > x;
How to use the MPI_Send
MPI_Send([0][0], x[0].size(),MPI_DOUBLE, 2, 0, MPI_COMM_WORLD);
?
Vitorio,
The standard provides no information on where the different parts of
the data will be, relative to
Hi Raymond, thanks for your answer
Le 09-07-06 à 21:16, Raymond Wan a écrit :
I've used Boost MPI before and it really isn't that bad and
shouldn't be seen as "just another library". Many parts of Boost
are on their way to being part of the standard and are discussed and
debated on. And
Hi Luis,
Luis Vitorio Cargnini wrote:
Thanks, but I really do not want to use Boost.
Is easier ? certainly is, but I want to make it using only MPI itself
and not been dependent of a Library, or templates like the majority of
boost a huge set of templates and wrappers for different
Thanks, but I really do not want to use Boost.
Is easier ? certainly is, but I want to make it using only MPI itself
and not been dependent of a Library, or templates like the majority of
boost a huge set of templates and wrappers for different libraries,
implemented in C, supplying a
just one additional and if I have:
vector< vector > x;
How to use the MPI_Send
MPI_Send([0][0], x[0].size(),MPI_DOUBLE, 2, 0, MPI_COMM_WORLD);
?
Le 09-07-05 à 22:20, John Phillips a écrit :
Luis Vitorio Cargnini wrote:
Hi,
So, after some explanation I start to use the bindings of C inside
I strongly suggest you take a look at boost::mpi,
http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_39_0/doc/html/mpi.html
It handles serialization transparently and has some great natural
extensions to the MPI C interface for C++, e.g.
bool global = all_reduce(comm, local, logical_and());
This sets "global"
Regardless of MPI, when sending C++ object over the network you have
to serialize their contents. The structures, or classes, have to be
coded to a stream of bytes, sent over the network, then recoded into
their complex object types by the receiving application. There is no
way to send
On Jul 4, 2009, at 9:20 AM, Robert Kubrick wrote:
> There is a proposal that has passed one vote so far to deprecate
> the C++ bindings in MPI-2.2 (meaning: still have them, but advise
> against using them). This opens the door for potentially removing
> the C++ bindings in MPI-3.0.
Is it the
Thanks Jeff.
Le 09-07-04 à 08:24, Jeff Squyres a écrit :
There is a proposal that has passed one vote so far to deprecate the
C++ bindings in MPI-2.2 (meaning: still have them, but advise
against using them). This opens the door for potentially removing
the C++ bindings in MPI-3.0.
As
On Jul 4, 2009, at 8:24 AM, Jeff Squyres wrote:
On Jul 3, 2009, at 7:42 PM, Dorian Krause wrote:
I would discourage you to use the C++ bindings, since (to my
knowledge)
they might be removed from MPI 3.0 (there is such a proposal).
There is a proposal that has passed one vote so far to
Thanks for your answers I'll use normal C-style MPI so. I checked
boost, but it seems it only supplies me with a shared communication
interface among the nodes, turning a little difficult to parallelize
the processes itself, also boost obligate me to have an MPI
installation too. Boost is
I'm sorry. I meant boost.mpi ...
Luis Vitorio Cargnini wrote:
Hi,
Please I'm writing a C++ applications that will use MPI. My problem
is, I want to use the C++ bindings and then come my doubts. All the
examples that I found people is using almost like C, except for the
fact of adding the
Hi,
Luis Vitorio Cargnini wrote:
Hi,
Please I'm writing a C++ applications that will use MPI. My problem
is, I want to use the C++ bindings and then come my doubts. All the
examples that I found people is using almost like C, except for the
fact of adding the namespace MPI:: before the
22 matches
Mail list logo
