Re: [OMPI users] MPI_Bsend vs. MPI_Ibsend (2)

2010-05-06 Thread Eugene Loh
First, to minimize ambiguity, it may make sense to distinguish explicitly between two buffers: the send buffer (specified in the MPI_Send or MPI_Bsend call) and the attached buffer (specified in some MPI_Buffer_attach call). Jovana Knezevic wrote: On the other hand, a slight confusion when

Re: [OMPI users] MPI_Bsend vs. MPI_Ibsend (2)

2010-05-06 Thread Richard Treumann
-| >  |05/06/2010 10:35 AM | > >--------------------

Re: [OMPI users] MPI_Bsend vs. MPI_Ibsend

2010-05-06 Thread Bill Rankin
Treumann Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2010 10:49 AM To: Open MPI Users Subject: Re: [OMPI users] MPI_Bsend vs. MPI_Ibsend An MPI send (of any kind), is defined by "local completion semantics". When a send is complete, the send buffer may be reused. The only kind of send that gives any indicati

Re: [OMPI users] MPI_Bsend vs. MPI_Ibsend

2010-05-06 Thread Richard Treumann
---| |05/06/2010 10:35 AM | >| |> | Subject: | |> >---------------

Re: [OMPI users] MPI_Bsend vs. MPI_Ibsend

2010-05-06 Thread Bill Rankin
Actually the 'B' in MPI_Bsend() specifies that it is a blocking *buffered* send. So if I remember my standards correctly, this call requires: 1) you will have to explicitly manage the send buffers via MPI_Buffer_[attach|detach](), and 2) the send will block until a corresponding receive is pos