[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Octave parallel computing toolbox
From: |
Ganesh Bikshandi |
Subject: |
Re: Octave parallel computing toolbox |
Date: |
Fri, 25 Jan 2008 00:10:30 +0530 |
The current library (which is under active development) is released
under Eclipse public license. But, I am not sure about the Octave or
Matlab port. That is part of a incubation program in the company I am
working for (IBM). When the project materializes, I can give a clear
picture about this. Now, the project is only in the pre-selection
phase. A good justification is required for the project to be
selected. I thought that since Octave does not seem to have good
parallel programming interface (like Matlab), that is a sound
justification to push my proposal. (Correct me, if Octave already has
a deluge of Parallel programming tools like Matlab).
We want this stuff to run in IBM hardware (like Bluegene) and we don't
want to be bogged down by any source code or licensing issues. Plus we
want to run in SPMD mode (atleast in the initial phases of
development). That means we want N Octave instances running, where N
is the number of compute nodes. Using Octave we overcome all the
licensing, source code and portability limitations. (IMHO).
On Jan 24, 2008 11:30 AM, John W. Eaton <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> On 24-Jan-2008, Ganesh Bikshandi wrote:
>
> | Dear Octave Developers/Users,
> |
> | We have developed a parallel programming library intended for (C or
> | F77) + MPI programmers. The library is more productive and offers
> | better performance than MPI.
> |
> | We are planning to have a MATLAB port of the library. But, since
> | MATLAB has several parallel programming tools (Mathworks themselves
> | ship a Distributed Computing Toolbox) which provide adequate support
> | for parallel programming, we are now pondering over porting to OCTAVE
> | instead. We want to know the state of the art in OCTAVE parallel
> | programming. We need a strong business case for our project. If OCTAVE
> | does not have capabilities similar to MATLAB, then poring our library
> | to OCTAVE will result in a new product. In this regard, if you can let
> | us know the current support for OCTAVE parallel programming and the
> | necessity of parallel programming tools in OCTAVE, that will give us a
> | clear picture.
>
> It is Octave, not OCTAVE.
>
> What are the license terms for your library How will it be linked
> with Octave?
>
> jwe
>