[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SYSTEMML-845?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15408502#comment-15408502
 ] 

Mike Dusenberry commented on SYSTEMML-845:
------------------------------------------

[~niketanpansare] When running in forced singlenode mode, these two scripts 
have equal performance (time & accuracy).  However, I'm seeing severe 
regressions when attempting to run with Spark (--master local[*], 50G driver 
memory), or even just standalone mode with hybrid-mr mode.  For example, I 
limited the {{epochs}} in both scripts to just 2, and then ran with 
{{-explain}} and {{-stats}}, and it showed a very large number of Spark jobs 
(as well as MR jobs in the hybrid-mr mode).  The logs are too large to include. 
 Looking through the explain plan, it looks like many operations are being 
mapped to Spark jobs in both scripts.  Any thoughts?

> Compare Performance of LeNet Scripts With & Without Using SystemML-NN
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: SYSTEMML-845
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SYSTEMML-845
>             Project: SystemML
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>            Reporter: Mike Dusenberry
>         Attachments: convert.dml, log08.03.16-1470268602.txt, perf.sh, run.sh
>
>
> This JIRA issue tracks the comparison of the performance of the LeNet scripts 
> with & without using SystemML-NN.  The goal is that they should have equal 
> performance in terms of both accuracy and time.  Any difference will be 
> indicate areas of engine improvement.
> Scripts:
> * [mnist_lenet-train.dml | 
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-systemml/blob/master/scripts/staging/SystemML-NN/examples/mnist_lenet-train.dml]
>  - LeNet script that *does* use the SystemML-NN library.
> * [lenet-train.dml | 
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-systemml/blob/master/scripts/staging/lenet-train.dml]
>  - LeNet script that *does not* use the SystemML-NN library.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

Reply via email to