I did not send the reply to the list - correcting now.
Also try running
$ ./runTests.py tests/test_linear_solvers.py --filter-less
to see the performance of available solvers applied to a Laplace problem.
For the reference, on my slow old laptop I get:
... solution times (rezidual norms): ... 1.41 [s] (3.286e-12) : i20 ls.scipy_iterative cg ... 2.25 [s] (1.714e-12) : i21 ls.scipy_iterative bicgstab ... 5.37 [s] (3.575e-12) : i22 ls.scipy_iterative qmr ... 12.92 [s] (4.135e-15) : d00 ls.umfpack ... 10000000000.00 [s] (1.000e+10) : i00 ls.pyamg ruge_stuben_solver ... 10000000000.00 [s] (1.000e+10) : i01 ls.pyamg smoothed_aggregation_solver ... 10000000000.00 [s] (1.000e+10) : i10 ls.petsc cg icc
The last three lines mean that pyamg and petsc are not installed. BTW. I recommend you to install petsc and petsc4py, as the iterative solvers and preconditioners in petsc are really good.
----- Forwarded message from cimr...@ntc.zcu.cz ----- Date: Sat, 25 Jul 2009 11:42:23 +0200 From: Robert Cimrman cimr...@ntc.zcu.cz Reply-To: Robert Cimrman cimr...@ntc.zcu.cz Subject: Re: Slow Sfepy on Fedoracore 8 To: Antonino Ingargiola trit...@gmail.com
Quoting Antonino Ingargiola trit...@gmail.com:
2009/7/23 Robert Cimrman cimr...@ntc.zcu.cz:
<snip> On my machine (a quad-core 64bit, gentoo), all tests >>> pass in: >>> >>> 32 test file(s) executed in 41.48 s, 0 failure(s) of 42 test(s) >>> >>> you should get similar results. >> In fact on a dual core ubuntu machine I run all the test in less >> then a minute. >> >> On fedoracore8 I don't know how slow is but surely more than 20min (I >> interrupted the tests) that is definitely too much. > It definitely looks like umfpack is not used.
Is possible that is another library that is not used causing the long runtime? For example atlas/lapack?
Maybe. I am really not sure what happens.
How can I check if scipy is using atlas/lapack/umfpack? Maybe I should ask on the scipy mailing list....
Yes, I have seen the thread - so it seems ATLAS (blas+lapack) is ok.
But it looks like the umfpack itself might not use it - can you try to compile it manually? Otherwise I cannot explain its poor performance.
----- End forwarded message -----