Laxmikant Kale
Laxmikant Kale
One thing to worry about is whether this change causes performance degradation by making the scheduler check the nodequeue too often (depend on whether the check is expensive, even for...
@ericjbohm @ericmikida @ZwFink review please.
I thought this was already merged. @ZwFink @ericjbohm .. will you please take a look?
Mathew, I am adding you to this issue simply because you are familiar with ckio. But the issue (probably) has to do with "spring cleaning" garbage collection scheme for broadcasts,...
*Original date: 2018-04-21 15:10:53* --- I think implicit in Phil's comments is the requirement/assumption that the new elements must be inserted by other existing elements of the same chare array....
some of these are dependencies for Charm++ and others are on top of Charm++. We probably need to separate those. Some may have loose dependencies, like METIS. (But it looks...
wow.. it was not even saved on a branch?
There is an important twist: allocation on one PE that is guaranteed to be freed by the same PE can be handle as above. The other case, where allocation and...
A nuance of intent: Do we want to think of nodegroup messages as a within-node load balancing mechanism also? If used for that purpose, it *should* be low priority. "Finish...
I have tested a fix in my copy, which works, but can sometimes slow things down. (I think because checking the nodeq, which is accessed via lock/fence, has a cost.....