On Mon, May 16, 2022 at 8:03 AM Vincent Delecroix <20100.delecr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I would say that code with parallel computations + cypari2 should not > be merged (as cypari2 does not support it).
is it parallel multiprocessing, or parallel multithreading? > > If you need parallel + PARI then use the C library directly with the > appropriate threads locks. > > If the problem comes from somewhere else, then it would better be sorted > out. > > Best > Vincent > > Le 16/05/2022 à 06:42, 'Travis Scrimshaw' via sage-devel a écrit : > > That sure seems like it. So what should we do about the ticket? Would there > > be opposition to merging this piece of code, as there doesn't seem like > > there is a fix coming for the likely underlying cypari bug anytime soon? > > > > Best, > > Travis > > > > > > On Sunday, May 15, 2022 at 4:14:31 PM UTC+9 vdelecroix wrote: > > > >> Probably related to https://github.com/sagemath/cypari2/issues/107 ? > >> > >> Le 15/05/2022 à 05:06, 'Travis Scrimshaw' via sage-devel a écrit : > >>> Hi everyone, > >>> On ticket #30423 <https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/30423>, Dan, Willie, > >>> and I have been working on a parallel-computation based implementation > >> for > >>> computing F-matrices that are used in math physics. However, we have been > >>> seeing some doctest failures sporadically that involve segfaults and > >>> linked-list corruption from (cy)PARI. Here are the logs from testing with > >>> the first and the last having full tracebacks. > >>> > >>> http://sporadic.stanford.edu/badlog-match > >>> http://sporadic.stanford.edu/badlog > >>> http://sporadic.stanford.edu/badlog1 > >>> http://sporadic.stanford.edu/badlog2 > >>> http://sporadic.stanford.edu/badlog3 > >>> > >>> The first question would be if anyone has an idea about what is causing > >>> this. I have this impression that PARI is thread-safe, but I am wondering > >>> if cypari is also thread/parallel-safe or if there are any specific > >> things > >>> that we should be careful about. (We’ve already had to work around a > >>> pickling issue with polynomials IIRC.) > >>> > >>> Second question is that because this is a Heisenbug and I suspect it is > >>> something upstream (and so far, nobody has been able to reproducing it > >>> during an interactive version of Sage), I was wondering what the policy > >>> would be for merging the ticket. I recall in the past that we have merged > >>> tickets with Heisenbugs with followup tickets noting the behavior, but I > >> am > >>> not 100% sure about that (and I wouldn’t necessarily know how to find any > >>> explicit examples). I was wondering if we could merge the ticket in an > >>> early beta version so that many people/systems can test it to see if it > >>> becomes more reproducible; of course this is assuming that the build bots > >>> are not consistent in reproducing this. Should we just mark any offending > >>> test(s) as “# known bug” and is there some general policy about this? > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> Travis > >>> > >>> > >> > > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "sage-devel" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/fd05e9f5-52b2-f2f8-bc02-c968c0a70e79%40gmail.com. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/CAAWYfq0B0H2E3JG-yPG%2B%3Dx-ZEutpbbH_NAW_tRD%3DJG9MPqrUiA%40mail.gmail.com.
