[Dune-devel] dune-istl umfpack support
Benedikt Oswald
benedikt.oswald at lspr.ch
Thu Oct 31 14:42:23 CET 2013
Hello Dominic, thanks for these numbers!
In fact, I am using SuperLU Dist (MPI, parallel, complex distributed matrix).
When you say SuperLU, do you mean SuperLU Dist or the serial version ?
Greetings, Benedikt
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. sc. techn. Benedikt Oswald - first engineer - LSPR AG - phone - +41 43 366 90 74
Technoparkstrasse 1, CH-8005 Zürich, benedikt.oswald at lspr.ch
"Passion is required for any great work, and for the Revolution passion and audacity are required in big doses."
Ernesto 'Che' Guevara, Letter to his parents.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Oct 31, 2013, at 1:45 PM, Dominic Kempf <dominic.r.kempf at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey Christoph,
> Hey devel-list,
>
> while doing a writeup of my work for Markus, I reran some of the
> performance tests and realized that infact SuperLU and UMFPack
> performance results are NOT within the same order of magnitude.
> UMFPack shows significantly better performance, see this table (I hope
> its somehwat readable)
>
> dofs 1e4 4e4 1.6e5 6.4e5
> T_{superlu} 0.076 0.395 2.707 19.839
> T_{umfpack} 0.064 0.245 1.367 9.176
> time savings 15.79% 37.98% 49.51% 53.75%
> $M_{superlu} 30.78 MB 123.23 MB 493.2 MB
> $M_{umfpack} 25.72 MB 88.66 MB 418.9 MB
> mem savings 16.44% 28.06% 15.07%
> $P_{superlu} 13.4 MB 55.64 MB 253.18 MB 1.16 GB
> $P_{umfpack} 11.8 MB 41.33 MB 177.14 MB 771.16 MB
> peakmem sav. 11.95% 25.72% 30.04% 33.53%
>
> T is the wallclock time here, M the total allocation size as given by
> valgrind and P the peak memory usage as given by /usr/bin/time -v.
> As you can see, there is something to be gained here!
>
> Best,
> Dominic
>
> On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 10:33 AM, Dominic Kempf
> <dominic.r.kempf at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hey Christoph,
>> thanks for testing the branch. My system gave me memory with zeroes,
>> yours didnt... thats exactly where I need you.
>>
>> I did a bit of measurements to compare superlu and umfpack, though not
>> on hard problems. In those tests umfpack was a bit faster and needed
>> less memory, within the same order of magnitude though. The original
>> reasons to implement umfpack support were conceptional difficulties
>> with superlu in multithreaded environment. Markus can elaborate more
>> on that (and whether umfpack actually solved the issue).
>>
>>
>> Best,
>> Dominic
>>
>> 2013/10/17 Christoph Grüninger <christoph.grueninger at iws.uni-stuttgart.de>:
>>> Hi Dominic,
>>> thanks for the quick patch. Using commit ...da3510863 it does no longer
>>> segfault.
>>>
>>> Bye
>>> Christoph
>>>
>>> --
>>> Une science n'était vraiment développée que quand elle
>>> pouvait utiliser les mathématiques. (Paul Lafargue)
>>> *********************************************
>>> CMWR 2014: 10th - 13th June 2014 in Stuttgart
>>> Please visit www.cmwr14.de
>>> *********************************************
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Dune-devel mailing list
>>> Dune-devel at dune-project.org
>>> http://lists.dune-project.org/mailman/listinfo/dune-devel
>
> _______________________________________________
> Dune-devel mailing list
> Dune-devel at dune-project.org
> http://lists.dune-project.org/mailman/listinfo/dune-devel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.dune-project.org/pipermail/dune-devel/attachments/20131031/6f86fdc0/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 841 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <https://lists.dune-project.org/pipermail/dune-devel/attachments/20131031/6f86fdc0/attachment.sig>
More information about the Dune-devel
mailing list