Re: RFC: Naming convention for ILP64 variant of BLAS/LAPACK
- Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2018 02:18:15 +0800
- From: Drew Parsons <dparsons@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: RFC: Naming convention for ILP64 variant of BLAS/LAPACK
On 2018-10-22 23:07, Mo Zhou wrote:
other packages likely to start wanting to use ILP64 ABIs? I guess it's
very much an 'HPC' sort of thing at the moment.
So yeah, some clarification in order I think, and an explanation of
HPC is indeed a related use case. I don't know any other package that
would need such an ILP64 BLAS/LAPACK interface except for Julia.
Actually by default Julia uses ILP64 version of openblas instead of
LP64, see [julia-ilp64-default].
I don't have a strong opinion on what 64 bit policy Debian should push
at this point in time. But I do have some experience with it on Cray.
I found that FEniCS failed to run on multiple nodes using the standard
(non-64) libraries (1 or 2 nodes was ok). But I got it running and
scaling well up to 60 nodes (1440 processors) when I built against the
64 bit versions of the libraries (PETSc and others). It didn't really
make sense since my mesh didn't have so many degrees of freedom that you
would have thought 64 bit pointers were needed. But in practice there
was a clear operational advantage to having the 64 bit libraries