[ccp4bb] [gsheldr: Re: [ccp4bb] phaser openmp]

2011-11-09 Thread George M. Sheldrick
-- Prof. George M. Sheldrick FRS Dept. Structural Chemistry, University of Goettingen, Tammannstr. 4, D37077 Goettingen, Germany Tel. +49-551-39-3021 or -3068 Fax. +49-551-39-22582 --- Begin Message --- In my experience, writing efficient multithreaded code is much harder than writing efficient

Re: [ccp4bb] phaser openmp

2011-11-09 Thread Pascal
On 11/09/2011 11:53 AM, Francois Berenger wrote: On 11/09/2011 07:21 PM, Pascal wrote: I have more problems with L2 misse cache events and memory bandwidth. A quad cores means 4 times the bandwidth necessary for a single process... If your code is already a bit greedy, the scale up is not good.

Re: [ccp4bb] phaser openmp

2011-11-09 Thread Francois Berenger
On 11/09/2011 07:21 PM, Pascal wrote: Le Tue, 8 Nov 2011 16:25:22 -0800, Nat Echols a écrit : On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 4:22 PM, Francois Berenger wrote: In the past I have been quite badly surprised by the no-acceleration I gained when using OpenMP with some of my programs... :( You need big

Re: [ccp4bb] phaser openmp

2011-11-09 Thread Pascal
Le Tue, 8 Nov 2011 16:25:22 -0800, Nat Echols a écrit : > On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 4:22 PM, Francois Berenger > wrote: > > In the past I have been quite badly surprised by > > the no-acceleration I gained when using OpenMP > > with some of my programs... :( You need big parallel jobs and avoid sy

Re: [ccp4bb] phaser openmp

2011-11-09 Thread Randy Read
Thanks for pointing out that link. The graph makes the point I was going to mention, i.e. that you notice a big difference in using up to about 4 processors for typical jobs, but after that point the non-parallelisable parts of the code start to dominate and there's less improvement. This is v

Re: [ccp4bb] phaser openmp

2011-11-08 Thread Ed Pozharski
See page 3 of this http://www-structmed.cimr.cam.ac.uk/phaser/ccp4-sw2011.pdf On Wed, 2011-11-09 at 09:22 +0900, Francois Berenger wrote: > Hello, > > How faster is the OpenMP version of Phaser > versus number of cores used? > > In the past I have been quite badly surprised by > the no-accele

Re: [ccp4bb] phaser openmp

2011-11-08 Thread Nat Echols
On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 4:22 PM, Francois Berenger wrote: > In the past I have been quite badly surprised by > the no-acceleration I gained when using OpenMP > with some of my programs... :( Amdahl's law is cruel: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amdahl's_law This is the same reason why GPU accelera

Re: [ccp4bb] phaser openmp

2011-11-08 Thread Francois Berenger
Hello, How faster is the OpenMP version of Phaser versus number of cores used? In the past I have been quite badly surprised by the no-acceleration I gained when using OpenMP with some of my programs... :( Regards, F. On 11/09/2011 02:59 AM, Dr G. Bunkoczi wrote: Hi Ed, in the CCP4 distribut

Re: [ccp4bb] phaser openmp

2011-11-08 Thread Dr G. Bunkoczi
Hi Ed, in the CCP4 distribution, openmp is not enabled by default, and there seems to be no easy way to enable it (i.e. by setting a flag at the configure stage). On the other hand, you can easily create a separate build for phaser that is openmp enabled and use phaser from there. To do this, cr

[ccp4bb] phaser openmp

2011-11-08 Thread Ed Pozharski
Could anyone point me towards instructions on how to get/build parallelized phaser binary on linux? I searched around but so far found nothing. The latest updated phaser binary doesn't seem to be parallelized. Apologies if this has been resolved before - just point at the relevant thread, plea

[ccp4bb] phaser openmp

2011-08-19 Thread Jochen Kuper
Dear all, it would be really great if someone could point out to me how to enable the openmp option for phaser during the compilation of the latest ccp4 release. The system will be a SUSE 11.3 64bit using gcc. Cheers, Jochen ---