On Jun 9, 2008, at 10:36 PM, mabshoff wrote:
Okay, I can confirm that with sage 3.0.1, sage -gp has the same speed
as my standalone GP build. So mostly likely the change to GMP 4.2.2
introduced a speed regression (probably the core 2 patches not being
applied properly).
Ok, I will
On Jul 22, 2008, at 12:35 PM, David Harvey wrote:
Okay, I can confirm that with sage 3.0.1, sage -gp has the same
speed
as my standalone GP build. So mostly likely the change to GMP 4.2.2
introduced a speed regression (probably the core 2 patches not being
applied properly).
Ok, I will
On Jul 22, 11:48 am, David Harvey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jul 22, 2008, at 12:35 PM, David Harvey wrote:
SNIP
This seems to have been fixed already in 3.0.5. Sorry for the noise.
david
Hi David,
we reverted to the old gmp 4.2.1 spkg in 3.0.5 since the only reason
to upgrade was to
FYI, when I computed bernoulli(10^7+4), I did so from sage -gp -- not from the
sage interface to gp.
On Mon, 9 Jun 2008, David Harvey wrote:
Hi,
This is on an 8-core 2GHz xeon running debian. (Tom Boothby's machine.)
In a clean build of sage-3.0.2:
sage: time x = bernoulli(4)
CPU
On Jun 9, 2008, at 1:19 PM, mabshoff wrote:
On Jun 9, 10:05 am, David Harvey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
Hi David,
This is on an 8-core 2GHz xeon running debian. (Tom Boothby's
machine.)
In a clean build of sage-3.0.2:
sage: time x = bernoulli(4)
CPU times: user 4.19 s,
On Mon, 2008-06-09 at 10:19 -0700, mabshoff wrote:
[...]
No clue. Can you actually compare the gp binary from Sage directly
with the timings from your self builid binary to eliminate the problem
that libPari is involved here? If the gp binary in Sage is slower by a
factor of three compared
On Jun 9, 2008, at 5:17 PM, Jonathan Bober wrote:
On Mon, 2008-06-09 at 10:19 -0700, mabshoff wrote:
[...]
No clue. Can you actually compare the gp binary from Sage directly
with the timings from your self builid binary to eliminate the
problem
that libPari is involved here? If the gp
On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 2:27 PM, David Harvey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Jun 9, 2008, at 5:17 PM, Jonathan Bober wrote:
On Mon, 2008-06-09 at 10:19 -0700, mabshoff wrote:
[...]
No clue. Can you actually compare the gp binary from Sage directly
with the timings from your self
On Jun 9, 2008, at 5:35 PM, Michael Abshoff wrote:
I wonder if we are just building GMP incorrectly. That bernfrac()
routine should depend mainly on the speed of long integer
multiplication and division. I am not a GP expert --- how does one
generate large random integers in GP? I could try
On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 2:43 PM, David Harvey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 9, 2008, at 5:35 PM, Michael Abshoff wrote:
I wonder if we are just building GMP incorrectly. That bernfrac()
routine should depend mainly on the speed of long integer
multiplication and division. I am not a GP
Doesn't gmp 4.2.1 build on cygwin? Do you happen to recall what the
issues were, as it'll be a problem for mpir too (though I did manage
one build on cygwin already).
Bill.
On 9 Jun, 22:58, William Stein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 2:43 PM, David Harvey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi Bill,
On Jun 9, 3:07 pm, Bill Hart [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Doesn't gmp 4.2.1 build on cygwin? Do you happen to recall what the
issues were, as it'll be a problem for mpir too (though I did manage
one build on cygwin already).
Bill.
At some point after a recent Cygwin update gmp 4.2.1
On Jun 9, 2008, at 5:17 PM, Jonathan Bober wrote:
On Mon, 2008-06-09 at 10:19 -0700, mabshoff wrote:
[...]
No clue. Can you actually compare the gp binary from Sage directly
with the timings from your self builid binary to eliminate the
problem
that libPari is involved here? If the gp
On Jun 9, 3:20 pm, David Harvey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 9, 2008, at 5:17 PM, Jonathan Bober wrote:
On Mon, 2008-06-09 at 10:19 -0700, mabshoff wrote:
[...]
No clue. Can you actually compare the gp binary from Sage directly
with the timings from your self builid binary to
On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 3:31 PM, mabshoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 9, 3:20 pm, David Harvey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 9, 2008, at 5:17 PM, Jonathan Bober wrote:
On Mon, 2008-06-09 at 10:19 -0700, mabshoff wrote:
[...]
No clue. Can you actually compare the gp binary
On Jun 9, 2008, at 5:58 PM, William Stein wrote:
On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 2:43 PM, David Harvey
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 9, 2008, at 5:35 PM, Michael Abshoff wrote:
I wonder if we are just building GMP incorrectly. That bernfrac()
routine should depend mainly on the speed of long
On Jun 9, 7:01 pm, David Harvey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jun 9, 2008, at 5:58 PM, William Stein wrote:
SNIP
The last version, so that we could build on cygwin, and also it was
needed
for OS X 10.5 64-bit. We will switch to mpir soon, as soon as
there is a
release :-)
17 matches
Mail list logo
