On 2011-08-11 13:07, dsimcha wrote:
On 8/11/2011 4:14 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2011-08-07 21:28, dsimcha wrote:
In addition to the bug reports I filed, why is it necessary to write any
serialization code to serialize through the base class? What's wrong
with just doing something like:
clas
On 8/11/2011 7:07 AM, dsimcha wrote:
On 8/11/2011 4:14 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2011-08-07 21:28, dsimcha wrote:
In addition to the bug reports I filed, why is it necessary to write any
serialization code to serialize through the base class? What's wrong
with just doing something like:
cla
On 8/11/2011 4:14 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2011-08-07 21:28, dsimcha wrote:
In addition to the bug reports I filed, why is it necessary to write any
serialization code to serialize through the base class? What's wrong
with just doing something like:
class Base {}
class Derived : Base {}
vo
On 2011-08-07 21:28, dsimcha wrote:
In addition to the bug reports I filed, why is it necessary to write any
serialization code to serialize through the base class? What's wrong
with just doing something like:
class Base {}
class Derived : Base {}
void main() {
auto serializer = new Serializer(
On 8/7/11 12:09 AM, dsimcha wrote:
On 8/6/2011 5:38 PM, jdrewsen wrote:
AFAIK David Nadlinger is handling serialization in his GSOC Thrift
project that he is working on currently.
Good to know, but what flavor?
The most important thing to note, and the reason it could not be
appropriate for
On Mon, 08 Aug 2011 01:08:39 +0900, dsimcha wrote:
On 8/7/2011 12:01 PM, Lutger Blijdestijn wrote:
dsimcha wrote:
On 8/7/2011 11:36 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
Currently, the only available format is XML.
Ok, I'll look into writing a binary archiver that assumes that the CPU
architecture on
On 2011-08-07 21:28, dsimcha wrote:
Yeah, I was trying to wrap my head around the whole "key" concept. I
wasn't very successful. I also tried out Orange and filed a few bug
reports. It may be that Orange isn't the right tool for the job for MPI,
though modulo some bug fixing and polishing it coul
This would probably work with the protobuf format.
Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 7, 2011, at 12:28 PM, dsimcha wrote:
> On 8/7/2011 2:27 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
>> On 2011-08-07 17:45, dsimcha wrote:
>>> On 8/7/2011 11:36 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
Currently, the only available format is XM
On 8/7/2011 2:27 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 2011-08-07 17:45, dsimcha wrote:
On 8/7/2011 11:36 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
Currently, the only available format is XML.
Ok, I'll look into writing a binary archiver that assumes that the CPU
architecture on the deserializing end is the same as t
On 2011-08-07 18:01, Lutger Blijdestijn wrote:
dsimcha wrote:
On 8/7/2011 11:36 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
Currently, the only available format is XML.
Ok, I'll look into writing a binary archiver that assumes that the CPU
architecture on the deserializing end is the same as that on the
seria
On 2011-08-07 17:58, dsimcha wrote:
On 8/7/2011 11:36 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
Good to know, but what flavor? As I see it there is a three-way tradeoff
in serialization. In order of importance for distributed parallelism,
the qualities are:
I can answer these tradeoff for the Orange serializa
On 2011-08-07 17:45, dsimcha wrote:
On 8/7/2011 11:36 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
Currently, the only available format is XML.
Ok, I'll look into writing a binary archiver that assumes that the CPU
architecture on the deserializing end is the same as that on the
serializing end. If it works, may
On 2011-08-07 18:15, Sean Kelly wrote:
I was mostly wondering if the serialized was all template code or if the
archived portion used some form of polymorphism. Sounds like its the latter.
The serializer uses template methods, the archive uses interfaces and
virtual methods.
Sent from my i
On 8/6/2011 12:32 PM, Sean Kelly wrote:
I'd love to be able to send classes between processes, but first we need a good
serialization/deserialization mechanism.
The more I think about it, the more I think that std.concurrency isn't
quite the right interface for cluster parallelism. I'm think
I was mostly wondering if the serialized was all template code or if the
archived portion used some form of polymorphism. Sounds like its the latter.
Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 7, 2011, at 8:19 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> On 2011-08-07 02:24, Sean Kelly wrote:
>> Is the archive formatter dyna
Nope. It would represent an external destination and defines the protocol.
Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 6, 2011, at 6:57 PM, dsimcha wrote:
> On 8/6/2011 8:26 PM, Sean Kelly wrote:
>> I'm hoping to simply extend the existing API. The crucial portion will be
>> the addition of a Node (base) type
On 8/7/2011 12:01 PM, Lutger Blijdestijn wrote:
dsimcha wrote:
On 8/7/2011 11:36 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
Currently, the only available format is XML.
Ok, I'll look into writing a binary archiver that assumes that the CPU
architecture on the deserializing end is the same as that on the
seri
dsimcha wrote:
> On 8/7/2011 11:36 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
>> Currently, the only available format is XML.
>
> Ok, I'll look into writing a binary archiver that assumes that the CPU
> architecture on the deserializing end is the same as that on the
> serializing end. If it works, maybe Orange
link for the D implementation: https://bitbucket.org/repeatedly/msgpack4d/
On 8/7/2011 11:36 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
Good to know, but what flavor? As I see it there is a three-way tradeoff
in serialization. In order of importance for distributed parallelism,
the qualities are:
I can answer these tradeoff for the Orange serialization library,
http://dsource.org/proj
On 8/7/2011 11:36 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
Currently, the only available format is XML.
Ok, I'll look into writing a binary archiver that assumes that the CPU
architecture on the deserializing end is the same as that on the
serializing end. If it works, maybe Orange is a good choice.
On 2011-08-07 00:09, dsimcha wrote:
On 8/6/2011 5:38 PM, jdrewsen wrote:
AFAIK David Nadlinger is handling serialization in his GSOC Thrift
project that he is working on currently.
/Jonas
Good to know, but what flavor? As I see it there is a three-way tradeoff
in serialization. In order of im
On 2011-08-07 02:24, Sean Kelly wrote:
Is the archive formatter dynamically pluggable?
I'm not exactly sure what you mean but you can create new archive types
and use them with the existing serializer. When creating a new
serializer it takes an archive (as an interface) as a parameter.
Sen
On 8/6/2011 8:26 PM, Sean Kelly wrote:
I'm hoping to simply extend the existing API. The crucial portion will be the
addition of a Node (base) type.
So Node would be the equivalent of Tid in the current API?
I'm hoping to simply extend the existing API. The crucial portion will be the
addition of a Node (base) type.
Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 6, 2011, at 2:38 PM, jdrewsen wrote:
> Den 06-08-2011 05:51, dsimcha skrev:
>> I've finally bitten the bullet and learned MPI
>> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wi
Is the archive formatter dynamically pluggable?
Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 6, 2011, at 11:51 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> On 2011-08-06 18:32, Sean Kelly wrote:
>> I'd love to be able to send classes between processes, but first we need a
>> good serialization/deserialization mechanism.
>
> Ha
On 8/6/2011 5:38 PM, jdrewsen wrote:
AFAIK David Nadlinger is handling serialization in his GSOC Thrift
project that he is working on currently.
/Jonas
Good to know, but what flavor? As I see it there is a three-way
tradeoff in serialization. In order of importance for distributed
parallel
Den 06-08-2011 05:51, dsimcha skrev:
I've finally bitten the bullet and learned MPI
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Message_passing_interface) for an ultra
computationally intensive research project I've been working on lately.
I wrote all the MPI-calling code in D against the C API, using a very
q
On Friday 05 August 2011 23:51:24 dsimcha wrote:
> I've finally bitten the bullet and learned MPI
> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Message_passing_interface) for an ultra
> computationally intensive research project I've been working on lately.
> I wrote all the MPI-calling code in D against the C
On 2011-08-06 18:32, Sean Kelly wrote:
I'd love to be able to send classes between processes, but first we need a good
serialization/deserialization mechanism.
Have a look at Orange, I don't know if it's considered good but it works
for almost all types available in D, the only available arch
I'd love to be able to send classes between processes, but first we need a good
serialization/deserialization mechanism.
Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 5, 2011, at 8:51 PM, dsimcha wrote:
> I've finally bitten the bullet and learned MPI
> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Message_passing_interface)
On 8/6/2011 2:57 AM, Russel Winder wrote:
The main problem here is going to be that when anything gets released
performance will be the only yardstick by which things are measured.
Simplicity of code, ease of evolution of code, all the things
professional developers value, will go out of the wind
On Sat, 2011-08-06 at 10:09 -0400, dsimcha wrote:
[ . . . ]
> Anyhow, D has one key advantage that makes it more tolerant of
> communication overhead than most languages: std.parallelism. At least
> the way things are set up on the cluster here at Johns Hopkins, each
> node has 8 cores. The "
On 8/6/2011 2:57 AM, Russel Winder wrote:
The main problem here is going to be that when anything gets released
performance will be the only yardstick by which things are measured.
Simplicity of code, ease of evolution of code, all the things
professional developers value, will go out of the win
dsimcha:
> 1. Is anyone besides me interested in this?
Other people are interested.
> 3. Would this be Phobos material even though it would depend on MPI, or
> would it better be kept as a 3rd party library?
I'd like one or more Phobos modules built on top of the basic MPI, so I think
it's
On 2011-08-06 05:51, dsimcha wrote:
5. For passing complex object graphs, serialization would obviously be
necessary. What's the current state of the art in serialization in D? I
want something that's efficient and general first and foremost. I really
don't care about human readability or standar
On Fri, 2011-08-05 at 23:51 -0400, dsimcha wrote:
[ . . . ]
> 1. Is anyone besides me interested in this?
MPI may be ancient, it may be a bit daft in terms of its treatment of
marshalling, unmarshalling and serializing, it may be only a Fortran and
C thing bolted into C++ (quite well) but it is t
I've finally bitten the bullet and learned MPI
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Message_passing_interface) for an ultra
computationally intensive research project I've been working on lately.
I wrote all the MPI-calling code in D against the C API, using a very
quick-and-dirty (i.e. not releasabl
38 matches
Mail list logo
