Hi Jeff,
Sure. I got asked for a standard yt performance benchmark to be run
to figure out performance of an analysis cluster and evaluate its
readiness. :) I think it's safe to sya that we should be pushing
things like IO, memory capacity and communication performance.
Adding such a set of scripts (and their results!) would be very useful
going forward, along with a little description of why we chose the
routines we did.
-Matt
On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 2:17 PM, j s oishi
Matt,
It might be helpful if you shared some more details of this particular benchmarking exercise, if you can. It would be helpful for making sure we present the most usefil information to the people asking for it as well as info that is useful to us going forwards.
j
On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 2:05 PM, Matthew Turk
wrote: Definitely, yes. For what it's worth, the specific use case I have in mind is for performance testing a system, so I think scalability will be important.
On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 2:01 PM, Cameron Hummels
wrote: It might be worth showing how well this works on a single proc as well as how well it works using parallel mode on a few different numbers of processors.
On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 1:57 PM, Christopher Moody
wrote: Perhaps a benchmark for simply calculating a derived field? This would then profile a much smaller codebase.
Also benchmarking projections/fields for AMR/octree/particles of similar resolutions would be pretty cool.
chris
On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 10:53 AM, Matthew Turk
wrote: Okay, I like that idea. So a unified script with timing for in each section might include:
* Halo profiling * Global projection * Global profiles * Global VR (CTF and OffAxisProj)
I think we probably want a large unigrid and a large AMR dataset to run these on, too.
On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 1:50 PM, Nathan Goldbaum
wrote: Probably a good idea to try some off axis projections or simple volume renderings to test the VR code.
On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 10:48 AM, Matthew Turk
wrote: > > Hi all, > > I got an email asking for a benchmark of yt. I think this is very, > very valuable to have going forward. I was wondering if anyone had > any suggestions? > > I'm thinking that we probably want to test things like the halo > finder, projections, and phase plots. Would a medium (1536^3) halo > profiling run do that? Do we want to add on some global projections > and phase plots as well? > > -Matt > _______________________________________________ > 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
_______________________________________________ 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
_______________________________________________ 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