On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 15:44, Barry Smith <bsmith at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
> I totally agree with you on this. Where we disagree is thatI don't > believe that MPI or pthreads have what is needed. For example since > pthreads sequentializes the waking up threads it cannot be used in a way > scalable to hundreds of threads. > Can't the threads all be live and poll on a shared variable? Or do you need a kernel-level primitive to activate a bunch of threads in one call? (I think this depends whether you want to have more threads than cores.) In any case, wouldn't that just be pthreads+1? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-dev/attachments/20111124/4f919d43/attachment.html>