David Nickerson wrote:
> Hi all,
>
>  From today's meeting minutes the following priorities were set for the 
> development of pcenv:
>
>     1.  Make an official release of what we have now, instead of just 
> snapshot releases.
>     2. Try to improve integration performance, by using CVODE from the 
> SUNDIALS project.
>     3. Investigate the possibility of getting Mac OSX support - Intel 
> only to start with.
>     4. Get editing support for MathML and the CellML structure working.
>     5. Add CellML Metadata support to the backend, and editing support 
> for this to the UI.
>
>
> I'm just wondering if 2 is more important than 1?
>
>  From feedback so far, the performance of pcenv is very poor compared to 
> other tools. There is currently (to my knowledge) no firm idea if this 
> is due to the underlying technology being used by pcenv, or simply due 
> to the numerical integrators being used not being as good as what most 
> people are currently using.
>   
Please refer to my messages on the 27th of this month, where I discuss 
the results of profiling it in callgrind.

The major performance bottleneck is the the evaluation of the Jacobian 
function (I use the standard O(n^2) method for generating a dense 
Jacobian in an array, and most of the time is spent evaluating the 
variables). Although COR is closed source and so I cannot see exactly 
what it is doing. Given that COR apparently isn't doing any optimisation 
here, it must be taking a comparable amount of time per Jacobian 
computation, so the difference must be in the number of calls to compute 
the Jacobian.
> Seems it would be good to address this question now, because if using 
> something like CVODE still results in the same poor performance then I 
> think some serious thinking needs to be done about the underlying 
> technology before an official release of pcenv should be made.
I understand that you already have CVODE working with CCGS, so perhaps 
you can give some indication of how well CCGS generated code works with 
CVODE?

Best regards,
Andrew

_______________________________________________
cellml-discussion mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.cellml.org/mailman/listinfo/cellml-discussion

Reply via email to