[Beowulf] The Case for an MPI ABI
Many of your questions may have already been answered in earlier discussions or in the FAQ. The search results page will indicate current discussions as well as past list serves, articles, and papers.
Rusty Lusk lusk at mcs.anl.govTue Feb 22 09:06:05 PST 2005
- Previous message: [Beowulf] The Case for an MPI ABI
- Next message: [Beowulf] The Case for an MPI ABI
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
From: Greg Lindahl <lindahl at pathscale.com> Subject: [Beowulf] The Case for an MPI ABI Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2005 21:08:24 -0800 > This talk: > > http://www.openib.org/docs/oib_wkshp_022005/mpi-abi-pathscale-lindahl.pdf > > mostly talks about why we need an ABI, who wins and loses as a result > of having one, and the pieces that could be in it. Please give it a > look. One piece you include is the replacement of the non-portable mpirun with an mpistart with standard arguments. You might note that the MPI-2 forum addressed this issue with the specification of an mpiexec with standard arguments. MPICH2 implements it. Rusty
- Previous message: [Beowulf] The Case for an MPI ABI
- Next message: [Beowulf] The Case for an MPI ABI
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
