original: 8.53935e-06 sec
rewrite: 8.55188e-06 sec
this time with 1 thread per MPI process, since that was most efficient in both cases. Most of the time is spent in inter-patch interpolation, which is much more expensive than in a "regular" case since this benchmark is run on a single node and hence with very small grids.
With these numbers under our belt, can we merge the rewrite branch?
-erik
hi Erik,You could try the ones atI haven't updated them in a while, but hopefully the ET is sufficiently backward compatible for them to still work.
--Ian HinderOn Sat, Jul 4, 2015 at 10:21 AM, Ian Hinder <ian.hinder@aei.mpg.de> wrote:On 3 Jul 2015, at 22:38, Erik Schnetter <schnetter@cct.lsu.edu> wrote:I ran the Simfactory benchmark for ML_BSSN on both the current version and the "rewrite" branch to see whether this branch is ready for production use. I ran this benchmark on a single node of Shelob at LSU. In both cases, using 2 OpenMP threads and 8 MPI processes per node was fastest, so I am reporting these results below. Since I was interested in the performance of McLachlan, this is a unigrid vacuum benchmark using fourth order differencing.One noteworthy difference is that dissipation as implemented in the "rewrite" branch is finally approximately as fast as thorn Dissipation, and I have thus used this option for the "rewrite" branch.Here are the high-level results:current: 3.03136e-06 sec per grid pointrewrite: 2.85734e-06 sec per grid pointThat is, the rewrite branch is about 5% faster.Hi Erik,That is very reassuring! However, for production use, I would be more interested in 6th or 8th order finite differencing (where the advection stencils become very large), and with Jacobians. If 8th order with Jacobians is at least a similar speed with the rewrite branch, then I would be happy with switching.IanDo you want to suggest a particular benchmark parameter file?-erik--