>
> I agree with Bill that performance portability is an issue. That is, the
> MPI standard itself doesn't really provide any guarantees here about what is
> fastest. Perhaps polling this mailing list will be helpful, but if you are
> looking for "the fastest" solution regardless of which MPI imp
David Zhang wrote:
Blocking send/recv, as the name suggest, stop processing
your master and slave code until the data is received on the slave side.
Just to clarify...
If you use point-to-point send and receive calls, you can make the
block/nonblock decision independently on the send and rece
Have you thought about trying out MPI_Scatter/Gather and at least seeing how
efficient the internal algorithms are?
If you are always going to be running on the same platform and want to
tune-n-tweak for that, then have at it. If you are going to run this code on
different platforms w/ differe
>
>
> So when you say you want your master to send "as fast as possible", I
> suppose you meant get back to running your code as soon as possible. In
> that case you would want nonblocking. However when you say you want the
> slaves to receive data faster, it seems you're implying the actual data
