mpi_test analog

[Jim Edwards]

Hi Wei-keng,

That's the answer that I thought I would get, and no I guess there is no
point in having one.   Is there a demonstrable performance benefit of this
non-blocking interface that would make it worth taking on the additional
memory management that it will require?

Jim

On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 1:18 PM, Wei-keng Liao
<wkliao at ece.northwestern.edu>wrote:

> Hi, Jim,
>
> The "non-blocking" APIs in pnetcdf are not truly asynchronous.
> They actually defer the I/O requests till ncmpi_wait_all.
> So, if there is a corresponding test call and it is called
> in between the post of nonblocking and wait, it will simply
> return false, indicating not yet complete.
>
> Given that, would you still like to see a test API available
> in pnetcdf? (That will not be too hard to add one.)
>
>
> Wei-keng
>
>
> On Feb 20, 2012, at 1:47 PM, Jim Edwards wrote:
>
> > I am working on an async interface using pnetcdf and wondering why there
> is no analog to mpi_test in the API?
> >
> > --
> > Jim Edwards
> >
> > CESM Software Engineering Group
> > National Center for Atmospheric Research
> > Boulder, CO
> > 303-497-1842
> >
>
>


-- 

Jim Edwards
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/parallel-netcdf/attachments/20120220/2d28bd89/attachment.htm>