Changes between Version 4 and Version 5 of 2011WP/2011Stream2/DynamicMemory

Timestamp:

2010-11-17T16:28:31+01:00 (13 years ago)

Author:

frrh

Comment:

--

2011WP/2011Stream2/DynamicMemory

@@ -270 +270 @@
 }}}
 If an allocate() is done in this way then handling any failure is difficult since there's no guarantee that the allocate() call will have failed for all MPI processes. Therefore, I think the best bet is to print out an error message and then do an MPI_Abort on MPI_COMM_WORLD.
+
+
+----
+
+>>Richard H. start
+
+I agree with the sentiment about dropping 'key_mpp_dyndist' in favour of only supporting the dynamic memory code. (On the basis that proliferation of cpp keys makes maintenance and development difficult in the long term and implies the need to test model developments using equivalent configurations under both static and dynamic configurations).     
+
+Re the local array work space. Agree that we can't rely on ulimit. With regard to allocating and saving large workspace arrays, would it be viable to allocate space for these in some generic sense at the start of the run rather than locally within each subroutine or code area? That might give us the opportunity of recycling the same space rather than allocating space specifically for each subroutine or code area. It might, however imply the need to 
+pass the generic array around through argument lists e.g.:
+
+{{{
+
+    Declare/allocate GEN_WORK_ARRAY1(jpi,jpj,jpk), GEN_WORK_ARRAY2(jpi,jpj,jpk), etc. somewhere during model initialisation
+
+    bla bla bla
+    "   "    "
+    CALL SOME_ROUTINE_X(GEN_WORK_ARRAY1(1,1,1,1), GEN_WORK_ARRAY2(1,1,1,2), etc)
+    "   "    "
+    CALL SOME_ROUTINE_Y(GEN_WORK_ARRAY1(1,1,1,1), GEN_WORK_ARRAY2(1,1,1,2), etc)
+    "   "    "
+    CALL SOME_ROUTINE_Z(GEN_WORK_ARRAY1(1,1,1,1), GEN_WORK_ARRAY2(1,1,1,2), etc)
+}}}
+
+Then in the routines we have:
+{{{
+    SUBROUTINE SOME_ROUTINE_X(local_work_array_X1, local_work_array_X2, etc)
+    bla bla bla
+    "   "   "     
+    END SUBROUTINE    
+
+    SUBROUTINE SOME_ROUTINE_Y(local_work_array_Y1, local_work_array_Y2, etc)
+    bla bla bla
+    "   "   "     
+    END SUBROUTINE    
+    SUBROUTINE SOME_ROUTINE_Z(local_work_array_Z1, local_work_array_Z2, etc)
+    bla bla bla
+    "   "   "     
+    END SUBROUTINE    
+}}}
+Anyway, just a thought. 
+
+Aborting using MPI_COMM_WORLD is particularly pertinent to coupled (OASIS based) models (otherwise things just tend to dangle).   
+
+>>Richard H. end
+
+----
+