more precisely: 'I do not know how to debug that further'
On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 2:49 AM, dan smith <[email protected]> wrote: > > Claudio, > > Thanks for your answer. > > When it comes to 8, the timing changes randomly, sometime times is less > than the time needed to solve 80 equations. I did 4 runs again, the times > were between 115000 and 125000. This program is very simple and each and > every thread does the very same thing using the very same code, no > difference between the threads. I do know how to debug that further. The > main thread just sends the pointer and the worker thread solves it after > receiving it, 3 lines are relevant.The thread is a basic windows thread > like in inproc_lat. > > > On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 2:13 AM, Claudio Carbone <[email protected]>wrote: > >> dan smith <[email protected]> wrote: >> >80 times: 64614micros and 134429micros, the serial is already faster. >> > >> >Going down to 8: 6345 and 328286... >> > >> >> There must be something wrong if it takes less to solve 80eqs than 8, no >> matter what. >> Why don't you save/print split times for each eq and each phase of the >> program? >> With 8 it isn't crazy to analyze the numbers. >> >> >> Claudio >> -- Sent from my ParanoidAndroid Galaxy Nexus with K-9 Mail. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> zeromq-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev >> >> >
_______________________________________________ zeromq-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
