itaps-parallel A question about iMeshP interface functions

[Jason Kraftcheck]

Onkar Sahni wrote:
> 
>   Ting is not suggesting alternate form of these functions. I think the
> question is related to error message/code, as per specification it says
> "return an error code if an entity is not in the partition". How does an
> implementation return this error if the entity passed is a remote one
> (non-local to processor or off-proc.). Infact in the partition can mean
> in any part (local and non-local).
> 

I had assumed that if one had a handle for an entity at all, that the local
processor knew enough about that entity to answer such questions (e.g. that
it is an interface or ghost entity.)  But I missed several discussions.  Are
we back to considering entity handles to be globally unique across all
processors?


>   These functions are not inherently expensive and we do not want to do
> any search on the local mesh on a processor in these functions.
> 

It seems to me that the iMeshP_getEntOwnerPart and iMeshP_getEntOwnerPartArr
are inherently expensive, and those are the only two for which I see a
requirement to return an error if the passed entity is not contained in the
partition.  I'm looking at the draft spec Karen sent on July 24th.  Is there
a more recent one?

- jason