On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 6:57 AM, Nathan Goldbaum <nathan12...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Note however that with the current version of the code, not having OpenMP >> will severely limit the performance, especially on quad-core machines, >> since an important factor in the speed comes from the parallel processing >> of the independent problem instances. >> > It seems you got much more than 4 times performance improvement -- which is the most you'll get from four cores, presumably :-). not that another 4 times or so isn't a good thing. But I suppose there may be another technical option to support multiple >> cores > > python threads with nogil? > For what it's worth (no idea what the order of magnitude of the technical > risk is for something like this in a library like numpy), it's actually > quite simple to dynamically test for OpenMP support at install time. > > > Basically, just try to compile a simple OpenMP test program in a > subprocess. If that succeeds, then great, we can add -fopenmp as a > compilation flag. If not, don't do that. > this sounds like an compilation-tiem tiem test, not isntall time. And install time isn't really helpful either, we really want plan old wheels, etc to work. We'd need a run-time check. -Chris -- Christopher Barker, Ph.D. Oceanographer Emergency Response Division NOAA/NOS/OR&R (206) 526-6959 voice 7600 Sand Point Way NE (206) 526-6329 fax Seattle, WA 98115 (206) 526-6317 main reception chris.bar...@noaa.gov
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org https://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
