On Wed, 2007-08-01 at 12:29 -0700, Justin C. Walker wrote:
>
> On Jul 31, 2007, at 10:54 PM, Jonathan Bober wrote:
> > On Tue, 2007-07-31 at 22:16 -0700, Justin C. Walker wrote:
> >> On Jul 31, 2007, at 18:36 , William Stein wrote:
> [snip]
> > That is puzzling. Are you sure that you have the latest version of the
> > code?
>
> I downloaded the .3 source and ran it on my 2.33 GHz Core 2 Duo. I
> compiled the program with several "-O" settings, and ran them with
> the argument '1000000000':
>
> Opt none: 2m11s
> Opt 3: 2m8 s
> Opt 2: 2m10s
> Opt 1: 2m8 s
> Opt s: 2m6 s
> Opt z: 2m7 s
> Opt fast: 2m6 s
>
> Not a lot of difference, but all at least 126 seconds. Any
> suggestions to figure out why this seems so far off from your (and
> other's) experience?
>
> Also, FWIW, if I run this through sage ("time number_of_partitions
> (10^9)"), the time is ~134s.
>
> Justin
>
Since the time with the self-compiled code is so similar to the time
with the sage-compiled code, I would guess that you are linking to the
sage mpfr library, which wasn't compiled with -O2 (or at least linking
to another version of mpfr that wasn't compiled with optimizations.)
Also, did you double check the answers? If my code is giving the wrong
answer on your computer, there could be some processor specific bug
somewhere.
> --
> Justin C. Walker, Curmudgeon-at-Large
> () The ASCII Ribbon Campaign
> /\ Help Cure HTML Email
>
>
>
>
> >
>
>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URLs: http://sage.scipy.org/sage/ and http://modular.math.washington.edu/sage/
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
