itaps-parallel Issues with prefix_sendEntArrToPartsPar and prefix_recvEntArrToPartsPar

[Tim Tautges]

Why is a single pair not sufficient?  Does it have to do with needing to 
know the handle on the destination proc?

- tim

Onkar Sahni wrote:
> The document Ting sent few days ago provides details of mesh migration
> code, specifically how it is done in FMDB. With this document I would like
> to mention one important point.
> 
> It is critical to realize that one set/pair of send and recv. is not
> sufficient to keep mesh-database up to date as mesh migration is done
> (whether for partitioning and/or for local mesh modifications). Basically
> to keep track of remote copies (independent of issue whether owner knows
> all remote-copies or all remote-copies know all other remote-copies), one
> set/pair of send and recv. is not sufficient. Hence,
> prefix_sendEntArrToPartsPar and prefix_recvEntArrToPartsPar will not be
> sufficient.
> 
> So we will have to re-visit these functions (as I remember the impression
> was that these would be enough for mesh migration for mesh-partitioning
> and NOT mesh-modifications, where Carl and I are trying to resolve issues
> with the latter (mesh-modification) one).
> 
> Please let me know if you have questions.
> 
> - Onkar
> 
> 
>> Dear All,
>>
>> The attached is the pseudo code of current FMDB migration algorithm and
>> some simple explanations. Please let me know if you have any problems.
>> Thanks.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Ting
>>
>>
>>
> 
> 
> 

-- 
================================================================
"You will keep in perfect peace him whose mind is
   steadfast, because he trusts in you."               Isaiah 26:3

              Tim Tautges            Argonne National Laboratory
          (tautges at mcs.anl.gov)      (telecommuting from UW-Madison)
          phone: (608) 263-8485      1500 Engineering Dr.
            fax: (608) 263-4499      Madison, WI 53706