safrooze edited a comment on issue #11913: Unexpectedly poor copy() performance URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/issues/11913#issuecomment-413372266 @wkcn You are correct that the evaluation is lazy, but calling nd.waitall() does indeed wait for everything to finish, so calling nd.waitall() after each evaluation isn't necessary. Also when I run your exact test, I get these results: ``` copy: elapsed: 5.21 copy via add: elapsed: 5.89 ``` Regardless of the difference in numbers, what your test does, I believe, is that it prevents the engine from utilizing multiple cores to parallelize the computation. So in effect you're forcing the engine to run in naive mode. My script, however, allows the engine to be as efficient as possible and it shows that `copy()` is not as efficient as `add` operator.
---------------------------------------------------------------- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected] With regards, Apache Git Services
