Re: [viff-devel] Optimizing preprocessing

On 21/10/2009, at 20.28, Marcel Keller wrote: Martin Geisler wrote: Janus Dam Nielsen writes: Hi Marcel, I am not opposed to your suggestion. However I would like to point out that in VIFF you compute on shares and not field elements! Well, we've actually made the outer runtime interface

Re: [viff-devel] Optimizing preprocessing

Janus Dam Nielsen wrote: On 21/10/2009, at 20.28, Marcel Keller wrote: Martin Geisler wrote: Janus Dam Nielsen > writes: Hi Marcel, I am not opposed to your suggestion. However I would like to point out that in VIFF you compute on shares and not field elemen

Re: [viff-devel] Optimizing preprocessing

Computing directly on the field elements is hacking the abstractions of VIFF. Computation on field elements or rather the representation of a Share can be useful as an optimization, however this optimization should be confined within applications or runtimes, and should not progress over i

[viff-devel] Orlandi preprocessing

Hi Janus, I remember you saying today that the preprocessing in the OrlandiRuntime is more efficient per item the more items are requested. Is that correct? I ask because in my optimizations, I limited the items being preprocessed per call in order to save memory. I would of course drop that

Re: [viff-devel] Orlandi preprocessing

Correct! On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 11:17 AM, Marcel Keller wrote: > Hi Janus, > > I remember you saying today that the preprocessing in the OrlandiRuntime is > more efficient per item the more items are requested. Is that correct? I ask > because in my optimizations, I limited the items being prepr

Re: [viff-devel] Orlandi preprocessing

I have not been following the discussion in detail, but it's true that the more items you request, the smaller the amortized cost, at least in theory. I also think it would be a very good idea to involve either Jesper or Claudio in this, if there is any place where you are in doubt at all. reg

Re: [viff-devel] Orlandi preprocessing

It is correct both in theory and in practice, so please don't limit the items per call! On 22/10/2009, at 20.33, Ivan Damgård wrote: I have not been following the discussion in detail, but it's true that the more items you request, the smaller the amortized cost, at least in theory. I also th