Hi Nathan,
Thanks for running this! I suspect the particles might be particularly bad
right now because of caching being disabled. What is the timing for gas
density?
-Matt
On Feb 14, 2014 7:38 PM, "Nathan Goldbaum"
Hi all,
Matt asked me to look at the performance of unitrefactor relative to 2.X and the current 3.0 codebase. I've done that using the following test script: http://paste.yt-project.org/show/4312
The script cycles through a time series, printing out particle masses for each dataset. In a perfect world, this should be an i/o-bound operation.
Currently the timings for running this test are as follows:
yt 2.x (dd1ca98) 18.37s user 1.43s system 99% cpu 19.997 total
yt 3.0 (1b17b7e) 48.76s user 1.81s system 99% cpu 50.743 total
yt-3.0 unitrefactor (8131901df14c) 78.72s user 2.00s system 99% cpu 1:20.85 total
So about a thirty second difference between each of the versions.
Clearly this isn't the best news given that we're moving to 3.0 going forward. That said, I don't think there has been a lot of focus on 3.0 performance, so it's possible (likely even) there's some low-hanging fruit for performance optimizations. There was also a big refactor of how i/o works for Enzo datasets (moving away from hdf5_light_reader toward h5py) - maybe that explains some of the difference between 2.x and 3.0.
Hope this is helpful,
-Nathan _______________________________________________ yt-dev mailing list yt-dev@lists.spacepope.org http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org