Hello,

okay, if you want to you can read through the code [1]. :)
For comparation it includes the program in C which I successfully  
parallelized with MPI and the same program in Chapel.
I hope I didn't forget to comment important lines. If anything is  
unclear just ask me.

Please consider the code won't win a beauty contest (especially the  
one in C) but at least my Chapel code is more readable than the code  
in C mostly written by the responsible employee. ;)

bye

[1] http://www-user.tu-chemnitz.de/~michd/fish.tar.gz


Zitat von Lydia Duncan <[email protected]>:

> Hi Michael,
>
> I think it will be difficult for us to offer further suggestions  
> without looking at the code ourselves, would you be comfortable  
> sending it?
>
> Lydia
>
> On 08/18/2014 05:27 AM, Michael Dietrich wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> today I compiled my program with the --fast flag.
>> Though it made both the serial execution much faster than before, the
>> parallel one became even slower compared with the serial. I'm still
>> trying to find any possible mistakes within my code but I can't find
>> any. Any suggestions?
>>
>> bye
>>
>>
>>
>> Zitat von Tom MacDonald <[email protected]>:
>>
>>> Hi Michael,
>>>
>>> Without --fast the compiler generates runtime checks, which slows
>>> down execution time.
>>>
>>> Please compile with the --fast flag and see how much execution
>>> time improvement there is.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> Tom MacDonald
>>>
>>> On Fri, 15 Aug 2014, Tom MacDonald wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Michael,
>>>>
>>>> Thank you for your interest in Chapel!  It's good to hear you are
>>>> studying high performance programming languages.
>>>>
>>>> Are you compiling your Chapel program with the --fast option?
>>>>
>>>> We need to know that before looking deeper.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>>
>>>> Tom MacDonald
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, 15 Aug 2014, Michael Dietrich wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm working with Chapel due to my bachelor thesis about high
>>>>> performance programming languages. My current task is to implement a
>>>>> particle simulation program of which I already have the code in C. It
>>>>> includes two possible algorithms for calculating the force acting onto
>>>>> the particles: A simple but ineffective one and the
>>>>> Barnes-Hut-Algorithm [1] which is much faster but a bit more
>>>>> complicated. The other calculations aren't that complex so for me only
>>>>> the calculation of force is important.
>>>>>
>>>>> I implemented the simple algorithm at first. For comparing the serial
>>>>> and parallel execution time I surrounded everything with a
>>>>> serial-statement, evaluating a bool variable I have to set in the
>>>>> command line. I didn't implement the multi locale improvement yet so
>>>>> it runs only on a dual core PC, using forall-loops. Finally the
>>>>> parallel one only needed half of the time of the serial, yay.
>>>>>
>>>>> I continued with Barnes-Hut. This one was a bit more work because the
>>>>> maintenance of the tree-structure leaves a lot of opportunities for
>>>>> mistakes. After a bit more time it was working as well.
>>>>> My issue is about the parallel execution time of this algorithm. Like
>>>>> in the other one I replaced the crucial for-loop with a forall-loop
>>>>> (the serial-statement surrounds the whole program). The problem is,
>>>>> that the parallel execution time is similar to the serial one,
>>>>> sometimes even longer.
>>>>> Of course I don't want you to read through all my code, but could you
>>>>> tell me some possible reasons, why this effect may occur?
>>>>>
>>>>> thank you very much
>>>>> bye
>>>>> Michael
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> [1] http://beltoforion.de/barnes_hut/barnes_hut_en.html
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Chapel-users mailing list
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/chapel-users
>>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Chapel-users mailing list
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/chapel-users
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> _______________________________________________
>> Chapel-users mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/chapel-users




------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Chapel-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/chapel-users

Reply via email to