netcdf-hdf mailing list is no longer active. The list archives are made available for historical reasons.
"Robert E. McGrath" <mcgrath@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Thu, 30 Jun 2005, Ed Hartnett wrote: > >> As I understand it, using fixed-length data, my different processes >> could write their data and go on their merry way, without waiting for >> anything. > > This can be done only if you know that the different processors are > not updating the same chunk. Surely this is easy to arrange. > > Fixed vs extended is not relevant to the basic issue: you must > coordinate all writes in parallel. But aren't writes that don't call extend independent? Doesn't that mean processes writing to them don't have to coordinate? Or did you mean they have to coordinate in that they each have to know what chunks they can write, but they don't have to wait for the other processes to do their writing. >> >> As currently implemented, H5Dextend is called when needed as you write >> the data in netcdf. That is, if you are writing a record at a time, >> H5Dextend is called for each record. > > This will be quite slow in parallel. But it will work. > > Presumably, user's can control this by batching the writes. > Well, if we batched the extends, that would help, right? For example, instead of extending it one record at a time, I could extend it 10 records at a time, and then for 9 out of 10 writes, I wouldn't have to call extend. Or am I barking up the wrong tree? Thanks! Ed -- Ed Hartnett -- ed@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx