II should be able to package up my test case. Please let me know if I can help Daniel Kokron NASA Ames (ARC-TN) SciCon group 301-286-3959 ________________________________________ From: [email protected] [[email protected]] on behalf of Rajeev Thakur [[email protected]] Sent: Monday, January 13, 2014 4:45 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [mpich-discuss] halo update performance comparison

Is there room for improvement?

Yes, we are looking into it. Rajeev On Dec 13, 2013, at 2:31 PM, "Kokron, Daniel S. (GSFC-610.1)[Computer Sciences Corporation]" <[email protected]> wrote:

All,

I have been interested in MPI datatypes since reading about them and playing with the benchmark found at http://unixer.de/research/datatypes/ddtbench/

I am working with a weather model that spends considerable time doing halo (aka ghost cell) updates. The existing code uses irecv/isend. Since most of the time spent doing halo updates is actually spent packing and unpacking the MPI buffers, I was hoping the use of datatypes would improve performance. Unfortunately, the datatype version is actually quite a bit slower than the standard non-blocking pt2pt code. I found this to be that case for both mpich-3.1rc1 and a recent version of a vendor MPI implementation (not MPICH based). I have not run this comparison using OpenMPI.

Is data type performance an active area of development? Is there room for improvement?

Daniel Kokron NASA Ames (ARC-TN) SciCon group 301-286-3959 _______________________________________________ discuss mailing list [email protected] To manage subscription options or unsubscribe: https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

_______________________________________________ discuss mailing list [email protected] To manage subscription options or unsubscribe: https://lists.mpich.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss