
Can we do it yesterday???!? On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 2:02 PM, Cameron Hummels <chummels@gmail.com> wrote:
I am not surprised--Kraken is the worst cluster on the planet.
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 10:26 AM, Matthew Turk <matthewturk@gmail.com>wrote:
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 12:01 PM, david collins <antpuncher@gmail.com> wrote:
I just did a test. 512^3 with 4 levels everywhere. On my desktop, it took 78 seconds. On Kraken it took 19 minutes. Unsurprisingly, Kraken's disk is not that fast today. This is, of course, and extreme example, but it isn't by any means rare for that system. 78 seconds isn't too bad, but today I'll be looking at >20 datasets, so it adds up.
I understand, 78 seconds will definitely add up. I'm impressed by the difference between Kraken and local. Or maybe flabberghasted? Either way, it's definitely something.
I definitely am in favor of an opt-in system, though, as many
applications
won't be this shape or on this disk. Or even an explicit call, such as ProjectinPlot.serialize()
Okay, cool. I think that'd be a good one, like Britton mentioned too.
pf = load(fname) t0=time.time() proj=ProjectionPlot(pf,2,'Density') t1=time.time() print t1-t0 Parsing Hierarchy100%
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Time: 00:00:00 Initializing tree 0 / 4100%
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Time: 00:00:00 Projecting level 0 / 4 100%
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Time: 00:03:39 Initializing tree 1 / 4100%
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Time: 00:00:00 Projecting level 1 / 4 100%
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Time: 00:04:12 Initializing tree 2 / 4100%
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Time: 00:00:00 Projecting level 2 / 4 80%
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ETA: 00:00:52 Projecting level 2 / 4 100%
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Time: 00:04:17 Initializing tree 3 / 4100%
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Time: 00:00:00 Projecting level 3 / 4 100%
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Time: 00:02:58 Initializing tree 4 / 4100%
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Time: 00:00:00 Projecting level 4 / 4 100%
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Time: 00:04:06 1167.0001719
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 9:18 AM, Matthew Turk <matthewturk@gmail.com> wrote:
Dave, out of curiosity, how long does a projection of one of your
datasets
take?
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 11:17 AM, david collins <antpuncher@gmail.com> wrote:
I use serialized projections quite frequently. As long as the
current
behavior, or some reasonable facsimile, is still available I'm for doing it now.
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 9:05 AM, Matthew Turk <matthewturk@gmail.com
wrote:
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 11:02 AM, Stephen Skory <s@skory.us> wrote: > Just to play devil's advocate here, what would it take to "fix" > serialization? Adding a checksum so that data changes can be > detected? > More than that?
That would partly fix the issue of fields/hierarchy changes not
being
detected (unless you manually mess with the data). But it wouldn't fix the deeper problem, which is that a) we scatter files willy nilly about the directory, which I am coming to feel is a really gross violation of expectations, and b) the process of auto-serialization doesn't save a huge amount of time in most cases. JohnW and I spitballed last fall about some of the biggest hierarchies he's dealt with in Enzo and I promised to write a Cython parser, which I never succeeded at.
-Matt
> > > > -- > Stephen Skory > s@skory.us > http://stephenskory.com/ > 510.621.3687 (google voice) > _______________________________________________ > yt-dev mailing list > yt-dev@lists.spacepope.org > http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org _______________________________________________ yt-dev mailing list yt-dev@lists.spacepope.org http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
-- Sent from my computer.
_______________________________________________ yt-dev mailing list yt-dev@lists.spacepope.org http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
_______________________________________________ yt-dev mailing list yt-dev@lists.spacepope.org http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
-- Sent from my computer.
_______________________________________________ yt-dev mailing list yt-dev@lists.spacepope.org http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
_______________________________________________ yt-dev mailing list yt-dev@lists.spacepope.org http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
-- Cameron Hummels Postdoctoral Researcher Steward Observatory University of Arizona http://chummels.org
_______________________________________________ yt-dev mailing list yt-dev@lists.spacepope.org http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org