Re: [OMPI users] MPI_REDUCE vs. MPI_IN_PLACE vs. F90 Interfaces

2006-06-02 Thread Michael Kluskens
On Jun 1, 2006, at 12:42 PM, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) wrote: Blast. As usual, Michael is right -- we didn't account for MPI_IN_PLACE in the "large" F90 interface. We've opened ticket #39 on this: https://svn.open-mpi.org/trac/ompi/ticket/39 I'm inclined to simply disable the "large" inte

Re: [OMPI users] MPI_REDUCE vs. MPI_IN_PLACE vs. F90 Interfaces

2006-06-01 Thread Jeff Squyres (jsquyres)
Blast. As usual, Michael is right -- we didn't account for MPI_IN_PLACE in the "large" F90 interface. We've opened ticket #39 on this: https://svn.open-mpi.org/trac/ompi/ticket/39 I'm inclined to simply disable the "large" interfaces in v1.1 so that we can get it out the door, and work on fix

Re: [OMPI users] MPI_REDUCE vs. MPI_IN_PLACE vs. F90 Interfaces

2006-05-30 Thread Michael Kluskens
My mistake: MPI_IN_PLACE is a "double complex" so the scripts below need to be fixed to reflect that. I don't know if the latest tarball for tonight contains these or other fixes that I have been looking at today. Michael On May 30, 2006, at 6:18 PM, Michael Kluskens wrote: Found serio