[jsdl-wg] FINAL CALL on SPMDApplication (was [Fwd: SPMDApplication draft 6 and request for parallel application names])

[Donal K. Fellows]

Andreas Savva wrote:
> I have not received any comments on the draft posted last week and there 
> are no outstanding issues. As we discussed on the last call I am putting 
> this now in final call within the group. The plan is to submit it to the 
> OGF Editor for public comment at the end of the week (Friday 16).
> 
> For those who may not be familiar with the process, after submission to 
> the OGF Editor this document will enter a public comment period of 
> 60-days so you will have plenty of time to comment later on.

Question: Is it deliberate that there is no mention of OpenMP in the
list of parallel environment names? Arguably it is "deliberate" since
OpenMP apps do not require any special actions to execute (we say
nothing about the building of apps in any case); a JSDL consumer could
handle all that sort of thing transparently since non-OpenMP apps will
be unaffected. But this might come up during Public Comment.

NumberOfProcesses: I'm not sure whether type is described correctly;
I don't know how to apply pseudoschema to nillable values. :-)

ThreadsPerProcess: There is an analogous problem here.

I'm wondering whether it is possible to use the SPMD stuff to (try to)
circumvent the resource allocations from the Resources section. If it is
theoretically possible to do that, we should state some Security
Considerations that make it clear that JSDL consumers should take care
to ensure that the allocations derived from the Resources bound any
requests from the SPMD Application.

That's everything I can think of. :-)

Donal.