Thanks very much, have a nice weekend! best regards, Huangwei
On 15 September 2013 11:29, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) <jsquy...@cisco.com>wrote: > On Sep 14, 2013, at 12:21 PM, Huangwei <hz...@cam.ac.uk> wrote: > > > do i=1, N-1 > > allocate (QRECS(A(i))) > > itag = i > > call mpi_recv(QRECS......., i, itag, .................) > > deallocate(QRECS) > > enddo > > I assume you're doing more than just allocate/mpi_recv/deallocate. :-) > > I don't know what A(i) is, so it's hard to say whether this is correct or > not. > > > Will this cause any problem using this way to introducing QRECS? > > I don't know. > > Can you make a small program that reproduces the problem? > > > Besides, the reasonable why I did not choose mpi_gatherv is that the > QRECS will put into YVAR in a non-consecutive way. for instance, if I have > 4 processors, the first element in YVAR is from rank 0, second from rank 1 > ......fourth from rank 3, and then fifth from rank 0 again, sixth from rank > 1 again....... But I will try your suggestion. > > Depending on how big the arrays are, it may still be faster/simpler to > gather(v) to a single array and copy to the final array. Shrug. It > depends on what your program is doing, and whether that is wort it to you. > > To be clear: either way should work fine; there may or may not be coding > and/or performance implications of each. > > -- > Jeff Squyres > jsquy...@cisco.com > For corporate legal information go to: > http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/ > > _______________________________________________ > users mailing list > us...@open-mpi.org > http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/users >
