[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Quoting Mikkel Krøigård <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>> Citat Martin Geisler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>
>> > I've looked at the GMPY code, and it is a fairly straightforward
>> > wrapper for the GMP library, as you describe.
>> >
>> > But I don't know if it makes it easier for u
Quoting Mikkel Krøigård <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Citat Martin Geisler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> > I've looked at the GMPY code, and it is a fairly straightforward
> > wrapper for the GMP library, as you describe.
> >
> > But I don't know if it makes it easier for us to benchmark just
> > because it i
Citat Martin Geisler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I've looked at the GMPY code, and it is a fairly straightforward
> wrapper for the GMP library, as you describe.
>
> But I don't know if it makes it easier for us to benchmark just
> because it is split into its own C code...
I never said it would. If yo
Mikkel Krøigård <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I remember trying out how to implement Python modules in C, and you
> needed to define special functions that map to C functions.
> Presumably there is something of the same kind going on inside gmpy
> that we can measure separately from the rest of th
I have made a quick change of the field-implementation so that it uses
gmpy instead of internal longs, and it seems that for integers in the
interval we usually use (~64 bits) it actually runs a bit slower (a
equality test took 808 ms. instead of 767), I made a run with a modulo
with 300 bits, and
Quoting Mikkel Krøigård <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Citat [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
>
> > I think there was earlier some version where arithmetic was done by calling
> > some
> > external C code.
> We are easily able to switch between gmpy (which is implemented in C) and
> Python
> arithmetic, if that's what
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> I think there was earlier some version where arithmetic was done by
> calling some external C code. From that I am guessing that it is
> feasible to make a version where all or most of the stuff in 1) is
> done by calling specific functions we can name and track rather
Citat [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> I think there was earlier some version where arithmetic was done by calling
> some
> external C code.
We are easily able to switch between gmpy (which is implemented in C) and Python
arithmetic, if that's what you mean.
I remember trying out how to implement Python modu
Quoting Martin Geisler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > Note that I am not saying we are in that situation, in fact I don't
> > think so - but I am saying that it is important to find out ASAP!
>
> Agreed! I would be very happy to hear suggestions as to how we can
> measure things in VIFF and/or Twisted.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi!
> I think that looking at the two bottlenecks as suggested is a very
> good idea and should have the highest priority. We don't know nearly
> enough about how much time Python in general and Twisted in
> particular is stealing from us. In principle, we could be in a
Mikkel Krøigård <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Citat Martin Geisler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>> I have already made a script which uses SSH to start any number
>> of playes here on DAIMI, and I've used it to test up to 25
>> players (it took 15 ms on average for a 32-bit passively secure
>> m
Mikkel Krøigård <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Actually upon reading my own email I realized that I forgot to
> mention the added bonus of having real internet communication going
> on if we have machines outside DAIMI involved in the testing.
>
> Martin, could you buy a dozen computers and set the
Actually upon reading my own email I realized that I forgot to mention the added
bonus of having real internet communication going on if we have machines outside
DAIMI involved in the testing.
Martin, could you buy a dozen computers and set them up in various locations
around the world? :)
___
Martin Geisler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi everybody,
>
> I have just talked with Thomas about how to benchmark VIFF and what we
> should try measuring. We found it difficult to come up with good
> answers, so now we ask here.
>
> We talked about the goals of benchmarking:
>
> * Determine bot
Hi Martin,
I think that looking at the two bottlenecks as suggested is a very good idea and
should have the highest priority. We don't know nearly enough about how much
time Python in general and Twisted in particular is stealing from us. In
principle, we could be in a situation where it is hopele
Citat Martin Geisler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I have already made a script which uses SSH to start any number of
> playes here on DAIMI, and I've used it to test up to 25 players (it
> took 15 ms on average for a 32-bit passively secure multiplication,
> and 19 ms for an actively secure one)
Hi everybody,
I have just talked with Thomas about how to benchmark VIFF and what we
should try measuring. We found it difficult to come up with good
answers, so now we ask here.
We talked about the goals of benchmarking:
* Determine bottle-necks. It wont do us any good if the carefull
optimiz
17 matches
Mail list logo
