Yeah, I think I figured it out on my own, hence the message deletion. Nonetheless, I don't see your comment.
On Thursday, December 11, 2014 11:29:15 PM UTC+1, Andreas Noack wrote: > > I wrote a comment in the gist. > > 2014-12-11 17:08 GMT-05:00 Robert Gates <[email protected] <javascript:> > >: > >> In any case, this does make me wonder what is going on under the hood... >> I would not call the vectorized code "vectorized". IMHO, this should just >> pass to BLAS without overhead. Something appears to be creating a bunch of >> temporaries. >> >> On Thursday, December 11, 2014 5:47:01 PM UTC+1, Petr Krysl wrote: >> >>> Acting upon the advice that replacing matrix-matrix multiplications in >>> vectorized form with loops would help with performance, I chopped out a >>> piece of code from my finite element solver (https://gist.github.com/ >>> anonymous/4ec426096c02faa4354d) and ran some tests with the following >>> results: >>> >>> Vectorized code: >>> elapsed time: 0.326802682 seconds (134490340 bytes allocated, 17.06% gc >>> time) >>> >>> Loops code: >>> elapsed time: 4.681451441 seconds (997454276 bytes allocated, 9.05% gc >>> time) >>> >>> SLOWER and using MORE memory?! >>> >>> I must be doing something terribly wrong. >>> >>> Petr >>> >>> >
