Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Implement NodeProxy as default objgroup for bare handlers #973

Closed
lifflander opened this issue Aug 5, 2020 · 1 comment · Fixed by #1146
Closed

Implement NodeProxy as default objgroup for bare handlers #973

lifflander opened this issue Aug 5, 2020 · 1 comment · Fixed by #1146
Assignees

Comments

@lifflander
Copy link
Collaborator

What Needs to be Done?

Currently, objgroups go through a different API and always have an object associated with them. While for many users objgroups are ideal sometimes a bare handler is needed or more useful. Much of vt is implemented using bare handlers.

Create a special objgroup proxy instance (and maybe a specialization with separate logic?) that sends messages to bare handlers using a symmetrical proxy interface.

@lifflander lifflander changed the title Implement NodeProxy as default objgroup for bare handlers Implement NodeProxy as default objgroup for bare handlers Aug 5, 2020
@lifflander lifflander assigned jstrzebonski and unassigned pnstickne Nov 3, 2020
@lifflander
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@jstrzebonski Here's the next issue I would like you to work on.

Right now, to send a message, you call theMsg()->sendMsg<...>(rank, msg);. The objgroup API allows you to send messages to an object group instance (always one per node) doing proxy[I].send<>(msg).

I want to the keep the active message send API as is, but add an alternative way to call it. Like default_proxy[I].send<>(..) that sends to the node without an object group, but just calls down to theMsg()->sendMsg.

Let me know if you have any questions.

jstrzebonski pushed a commit that referenced this issue Nov 14, 2020
jstrzebonski pushed a commit that referenced this issue Nov 14, 2020
jstrzebonski pushed a commit that referenced this issue Dec 1, 2020
jstrzebonski pushed a commit that referenced this issue Dec 1, 2020
jstrzebonski pushed a commit that referenced this issue Dec 1, 2020
lifflander added a commit that referenced this issue Dec 14, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants