Wow, everyone heard that!
---------------------------------------------------- Best wishes! Xianhua Li Information Technology Laboratory Fujitsu Research & Development Center Co.,LTD. 13F Tower A, Ocean International Center, No.56 Dong Si Huan Zhong Rd, Chaoyang District, Beijing, China ,100025 E-mail:[email protected] 发件人: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] 代表 Tom Hoar 发送时间: 2011年11月18日 10:28 收件人: [email protected] 抄送: [email protected] 主题: Re: [Moses-support] KenLM format consistency Thanks Hieu. Ken, did you hear that? Hieu's calling you a "funky" guy! Tom On Fri, 18 Nov 2011 09:25:22 +0700, Hieu Hoang <[email protected]> wrote: Hi Tom You don't need to rebinarise the phrase and reordering table when switching between 32/64 bit machines. If you see any different, please let me know It only required with KenLM ('til now) because this has some funky optimisation which is memory/gcc-version dependent On 18 November 2011 07:21, Tom Hoar <[email protected]> wrote: Thank you Ken, this is great news because DoMY compiles for the 32/64-bit platform during installation, and users aren't aware of the differences. Now, if they upgrade from a test 32-bit platform, they can reuse the LM's on the new 64-bit. As a point of reference, is it necessary to re-compile the binarized phrase and reordering tables between 32/64-bit platforms? It's been a while since I encountered this and simply don't remember. Tom On Thu, 17 Nov 2011 19:25:01 +0000, Kenneth Heafield <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > A number of people have complained that kenlm binary files were > not > portable across 32-bit and 64-bit or across ancient gcc (RedHat stale > linux) to modern gcc. 974a708 fixes this. > > If you run 64-bit with modern gcc (as most of you do), your > current > binary files will continue to work and will now be portable. > Otherwise, > it will throw an exception if you try to load an old file. > > The easiest way to determine if your binary file needs to > rebuilt > is to run > > lm/query binary_file > > If it returns success then there is no need to rebuild. > > Binary files are not portable across endianness and never will be. > In > general, portability across architecture pairs other than x86 and > x86_64 > is not guaranteed. > > Kenneth > _______________________________________________ > Moses-support mailing list > [email protected] > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/moses-support _______________________________________________ Moses-support mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/moses-support
_______________________________________________ Moses-support mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/moses-support
