#13400: Use strong caches diligently
-------------------------------+--------------------------------------------
Reporter: nbruin | Owner: robertwb
Type: enhancement | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone: sage-wishlist
Component: coercion | Resolution:
Keywords: | Work issues:
Report Upstream: N/A | Reviewers:
Authors: | Merged in:
Dependencies: | Stopgaps:
-------------------------------+--------------------------------------------
Comment (by SimonKing):
Perhaps the routine I wrote for extracting the execution times of the
individual tests was wrong. I tried again. In the following, I give the
time t1 in sage-5.2.beta3 versus the time t2 with #12313 and the patch
from here, followed by the name of the test.
In the following tests tests, patched sage is slower by at least 5 seconds
with a regression of at least 15% (`t2>=1.15*t1`):
{{{
18.40 vs. 24.80: sage -t -force_lib
devel/sage/sage/modular/hecke/submodule.py
15.10 vs. 24.50: sage -t -force_lib
devel/sage/sage/modular/abvar/homspace.py
2.40 vs. 7.90: sage -t -force_lib
devel/sage/sage/combinat/combinatorial_algebra.py
22.60 vs. 28.10: sage -t -force_lib
devel/sage/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/gal_reps.py
27.80 vs. 38.30: sage -t -force_lib
devel/sage/sage/schemes/toric/chow_group.py
23.80 vs. 30.00: sage -t -force_lib
devel/sage/sage/modular/abvar/abvar.py
111.30 vs. 141.60: sage -t -force_lib devel/sage/sage/plot/plot.py
196.30 vs. 247.40: sage -t -force_lib
devel/sage/sage/combinat/sf/macdonald.py
22.00 vs. 27.50: sage -t -force_lib
devel/sage/sage/combinat/root_system/pieri_factors.py
24.10 vs. 30.10: sage -t -force_lib
devel/sage/sage/modular/local_comp/local_comp.py
2.70 vs. 14.80: sage -t -force_lib
devel/sage/sage/categories/homset.py
58.00 vs. 71.80: sage -t -force_lib
devel/sage/sage/modular/overconvergent/hecke_series.py
20.60 vs. 25.80: sage -t -force_lib
devel/sage/sage/matrix/benchmark.py
22.50 vs. 27.50: sage -t -force_lib
devel/sage/sage/modular/modsym/ambient.py
38.70 vs. 45.70: sage -t -force_lib
devel/sage/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/padic_lseries.py
23.00 vs. 28.00: sage -t -force_lib
devel/sage/sage/modular/modsym/space.py
9.00 vs. 19.00: sage -t -force_lib devel/sage/sage/combinat/sf/sfa.py
29.50 vs. 50.20: sage -t -force_lib
devel/sage/sage/combinat/partition_algebra.py
35.50 vs. 44.30: sage -t -force_lib
devel/sage/sage/quadratic_forms/quadratic_form__local_representation_conditions.py
2.00 vs. 12.00: sage -t -force_lib
devel/sage/sage/structure/coerce_dict.pyx
20.40 vs. 26.20: sage -t -force_lib
devel/sage/sage/modular/modform/element.py
}}}
Here are the tests that became faster in the patched version by at least 3
seconds, improving by at least 7% (`t1>=1.07*t2`):
{{{
101.20 vs. 93.40: sage -t -force_lib
devel/sage/sage/calculus/riemann.pyx
48.90 vs. 43.80: sage -t -force_lib
devel/sage/doc/en/thematic_tutorials/lie/weyl_character_ring.rst
68.30 vs. 41.10: sage -t -force_lib
devel/sage/sage/interfaces/expect.py
33.30 vs. 28.70: sage -t -force_lib
devel/sage/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/ell_curve_isogeny.py
67.30 vs. 54.90: sage -t -force_lib
devel/sage/sage/schemes/elliptic_curves/heegner.py
}}}
The worst regression seems to be in
devel/sage/sage/combinat/partition_algebra.py, a regression of more than
70%: `(50.2-29.5)/29.5`. So, perhaps one should start to see what is
happening there.
--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/ticket/13400#comment:21>
Sage <http://www.sagemath.org>
Sage: Creating a Viable Open Source Alternative to Magma, Maple, Mathematica,
and MATLAB
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-trac" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac?hl=en.
