Brad,
On Sep 2, 2005, at 6:17 PM, Brad Penoff wrote:
hey Jeff/Galen,
Thanks to both of you for helping answer our questions, both on and off
the list. Currently, we're doing a lot of writing trying to focus on
MPI
implementation design strategies, so this has helped us certainly;
hopefully
Sound reasonable - I am for being able to turn on optional things
that will improve performance...
Thanks,
Rich
On Aug 12, 2005, at 9:14 PM, Brian Barrett wrote:
On Aug 12, 2005, at 9:43 PM, Rich L. Graham wrote:
Sounds like I got off the call a bit too early ;-)
Can we choose to
Brian,
Sounds like I got off the call a bit too early ;-)
Can we choose to use standard platform libraries, or are we
pinning
ourselves into a corner ? I.e., is this optional ?
What sort of problems are we getting into playing with pre-load
options ? I would
be VERY careful her
Please make sure that foreign nationals have the building this is
going to take place in (presumably, ACL-west) on their paperwork,
or else they can't participate.
Rich
On Jul 18, 2005, at 6:59 AM, Jeff Squyres wrote:
Did we ever set a day/time for the collectives meeting at LANL next
week? (
On Jul 18, 2005, at 6:28 AM, Jeff Squyres wrote:
On Jul 18, 2005, at 2:50 AM, Matt Leininger wrote:
Generally speaking, if you launch <=N processes in a job on a node
(where N == number of CPUs on that node), then we set processor
affinity. We set each process's affinity to the CPU number ac
