Re: [petsc-users] O3 versus O2

2023-03-08 Thread Jed Brown
You can test a benchmark problem with both. It probably doesn't make a lot of 
difference with the solver configuration you've selected (most of those 
operations are memory bandwidth limited).

If your residual and Jacobian assembly code is written to vectorize, you may 
get significant benefit from architecture-specific optimizations like 
-march=skylake.

Alfredo Jaramillo  writes:

> Dear community,
>
> We are in the middle of testing a simulator where the main computational
> bottleneck is solving a linear problem. We do this by calling
> GMRES+BoomerAMG through PETSc.
>
> This is a commercial code, pretended to serve clients with workstations or
> with access to clusters.
>
> Would you recommend O3 versus O2 optimizations? Maybe just to compile the
> linear algebra libraries?
>
> Some years ago, I worked on another project where going back to O2 solved a
> weird runtime error that I was never able to solve. This triggers my
> untrust.
>
> Thank you for your time!
> Alfredo


[petsc-users] O3 versus O2

2023-03-08 Thread Alfredo Jaramillo
Dear community,

We are in the middle of testing a simulator where the main computational
bottleneck is solving a linear problem. We do this by calling
GMRES+BoomerAMG through PETSc.

This is a commercial code, pretended to serve clients with workstations or
with access to clusters.

Would you recommend O3 versus O2 optimizations? Maybe just to compile the
linear algebra libraries?

Some years ago, I worked on another project where going back to O2 solved a
weird runtime error that I was never able to solve. This triggers my
untrust.

Thank you for your time!
Alfredo