On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 11:17 AM, Anders Logg <l...@simula.no> wrote: > On Mon, Jun 07, 2010 at 01:24:02PM +0200, Anders Logg wrote: >> On Wed, May 05, 2010 at 10:32:07AM +0200, Anders Logg wrote: >> > On Wed, May 05, 2010 at 09:11:21AM +0100, Garth N. Wells wrote: >> > > >> > > >> > > On 03/05/10 14:04, Anders Logg wrote: >> > > >I've been going through all benchmarks and made changes to get >> > > >everything to compile and run properly. I've also made adjustments to >> > > >some parameters to get reasonable running times. >> > > > >> > > >I'm currently working on the parallel speedup benchmark (fem/speedup) >> > > >but then I think we should be in pretty good shape (for now). >> > > > >> > > >It would be good for everyone that has any interest in the benchmark >> > > >suite to take a look now at all the benchmarks and see if something >> > > >can be improved. As mentioned before, Johannes will backport at least >> > > >some of the benchmarks to earlier versions and then it becomes very >> > > >important that we keep the benchmarks fixed. We can't artibrarily go >> > > >in and change say a mesh size or form since that would break the >> > > >history. >> > > > >> > > >So speak now or forever hold your peace. >> > > > >> > > >> > > I won't be able to look at the benchmarks for a while, but I would >> > > like to have benchmarks to cover some areas where I know DOLFIN >> > > could do with some performance improvements. Off the top of my head >> > > two areas are: >> > > >> > > - Assembly of forms with many coefficients (calls to eval(..) are slow) >> > >> > It is easy to add more test cases to bench/fem/assembly/cpp/. Ideally, >> > they should be added before recording historical data. Both individual >> > and total running time is recorded so only the total time would be >> > messed up if we add a new test case, but if we want historical timings >> > for handling of coefficients (which might be important since that is >> > something we have been changing around) we should add it now. >> > >> > Do you have any particular case(s) in mind? It's very easy to add so >> > we could do it quickly. >> > >> > > - Repeated solution of linear systems (reuse of preconditioners, >> > > reuse of symbolic factorisation, etc) >> > >> > Those are new test cases so they can just be added when we feel like >> > it (but we might not get historical data). >> >> Does anyone have any more test cases to add? If not, it might be a >> good time to ask Johannes to look at the tests and try to backport >> them to earlier version. >> >> I am semi-happy with our current set of benchmarks. If anyone wants to >> add something, please do it now (or announce that you plan to add >> something). >> >> Here's the current list: >> >> http://www.fenics.org/bench/ >> >> All benchmarks are available in dolfin/bench. > > ok, so let's consider the current set of benchmarks "good enough" for now. > > So I'd say we freeze the current set of benchmarks (more can be added > later but the current set should not be touched). > > I will ask Johannes to look at backporting the benchmarks to earlier > DOLFIN versions to run on the buildbot.
Most of the benchmarks are now backported for all DOLFIN releases back to 0.7.3. The result can be seen at http://www.fenics.org/bench/ Johannes _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~dolfin Post to : dolfin@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~dolfin More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
