Charm++ parallel programming system

[Kelly Davis <kdavis AT alum.mit.edu>]

>This particular set of options is not expected to work. You've
>requested that the runtime be built to support 2 different fault
>tolerance protocols simultaneously, where the code is only written to
>enable one at a time.

So, I have to choose if I want "fault tolerance support" xor if I want
"message logging fault tolerance support"?

Also, could you elaborate a bit more on what...

>In their current form, it doesn't really make sense to combine them

means?

>...they're both somewhat experimental, and not so much suited for
> day-to-day use as yet.

Reading the documentation I was under the impression that fault tolerance
was a supported feature. Is this not the case? (Actually, this was the main
reason I choose to use charm++)

>Since you're building the OS X, I assume you're targeting a single node,
>rather than a cluster

I am targeting a single node for development, but for deployment I am
going to use a linux cluster.

>So, my overall suggestion: if you just want to write, compile, and run
>Charm++ applications, drop the FT options.


This seems reasonable, but it still leaves open the possibility that
code paths in the development version are not exercised in the
deployment version.

To minimize the slip 'twixt the cup and the lip I thought it wise to build
and deploy on setups that are as similar as is possible. (Costs prevent
developing on Linux) It's a pity one can not do so.

>We'll add a test in the code that will give a more explicit error 
>on these incompatible options and stop the build cleanly.

Ok, thanks.

Kelly