Thanks Patrick. Yep, I did see that but I couldn't parse it. I guess they 
are global variables but I'm not sure how to set them or use them. Sorry to 
be dense here...

On Wednesday, June 18, 2014 2:54:31 PM UTC-7, Patrick O'Leary wrote:
>
> The flags are defined in the FFTW documentation: 
> http://www.fftw.org/doc/Planner-Flags.html
>
> On Wednesday, June 18, 2014 4:30:30 PM UTC-5, Ethan Anderes wrote:
>>
>> Hi Tim:
>>
>> Do you happen to know where I can find some documentation or code 
>> snippets on using FFTW.MEASURE or FFTW.PATIENT? I also have some 
>> performance critical code that I've failed to speed up with plan_fft and 
>> plan_ifft. After reading your suggesting I tried to search for info 
>> on FFTW.MEASURE or FFTW.PATIENT but couldn't really find anything (I can't 
>> follow the source code either).
>>
>> Any help would be greatly appreciated.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Ethan
>>
>> On Wednesday, June 18, 2014 4:40:10 AM UTC-7, Tim Holy wrote:
>>>
>>> Have you profiled it? Is most of the time spent in the ffts? Assuming it 
>>> is the 
>>> ffts that dominate, try preplanning with FFTW.MEASURE or FFTW.PATIENT. 
>>>
>>> I seem to recall that some months ago I posted some Matlab/Julia FFT 
>>> benchmarks to one of the mailing lists or the github repository. I 
>>> suspect 
>>> that Matlab has some clever tricks up their sleeve for 
>>> fft-planning---they seem 
>>> to be able to settle on a good algorithm with much less time than I find 
>>> I need 
>>> with FFTW.MEASURE or FFTW.PATIENT. It would be lovely to figure out a 
>>> better 
>>> approach; with 3d FFTs I often find that to get good performance I need 
>>> to 
>>> devote about 60s to planning for each different size I run, which is a 
>>> bit of a 
>>> pain. 
>>>
>>> --Tim 
>>>
>>> On Wednesday, June 18, 2014 03:35:06 AM Oliver Lylloff wrote: 
>>> > Hello all, 
>>> > 
>>> > I'm computing a 2D convolution with fft and seeing a timing difference 
>>> > between Matlab and Julia, with Matlab being about 2x faster than 
>>> Julia. 
>>> > I've simplified my code down to an example (see gist here: 
>>> > https://gist.github.com/1oly/51f39a831cef3931e7b8). The bottleneck of 
>>> my 
>>> > code is evaluating the function 
>>> > 
>>> > function func(b,x,Fps) 
>>> >     r = fftshift(ifft(fft(x).*Fps)) - b; 
>>> >     return r 
>>> > end 
>>> > 
>>> > Timings are after one initial run to remove overhead and Matlab is 
>>> single 
>>> > thread. 
>>> > 
>>> > Matlab (-singleCompThread) = 0.0026s 
>>> > Julia = 0.005s 
>>> > 
>>> > Does other people see this difference as well? Any suggestions to 
>>> possible 
>>> > speed-ups? 
>>> > 
>>> > Best, 
>>> > Oliver 
>>>
>>>

Reply via email to