Skip to content

Conversation

@SoongNoonien
Copy link
Member

@SoongNoonien SoongNoonien commented Feb 20, 2025

As proposed in #250 I tried to perform some computations with mpolys. This is the result when the normal_form computation is done with mpolys instead of upolys.

With current master (example from PR #238):

julia> @time scalar_test(g)
 76.226584 seconds (236.21 M allocations: 24.637 GiB, 12.26% gc time, 6.17% compilation time)

julia> @time scalar_test(g)
 70.591532 seconds (233.28 M allocations: 24.491 GiB, 12.26% gc time)

With this PR:

julia> @time scalar_test(g)
 74.355277 seconds (235.96 M allocations: 24.629 GiB, 12.84% gc time, 6.04% compilation time)

julia> @time scalar_test(g)
 69.110084 seconds (233.02 M allocations: 24.484 GiB, 11.68% gc time)

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Feb 20, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 95.37%. Comparing base (dca1ec2) to head (1894be0).

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #257      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   95.96%   95.37%   -0.59%     
==========================================
  Files          12       12              
  Lines         843      844       +1     
==========================================
- Hits          809      805       -4     
- Misses         34       39       +5     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@fingolfin
Copy link
Member

Before:

julia> using GenericCharacterTables, Chairmarks

julia> g=generic_character_table("3D4.0");

julia> @b scalar_product(g[3],g[7])
3.098 ms (75572 allocs: 3.831 MiB)

julia> @b scalar_product(g[20],g[21])
77.750 ms (995574 allocs: 92.981 MiB, 13.43% gc time)

After:

julia> using GenericCharacterTables, Chairmarks

julia> g=generic_character_table("3D4.0");

julia> @b scalar_product(g[3],g[7])
2.964 ms (75351 allocs: 3.824 MiB)

julia> @b scalar_product(g[20],g[21])
79.332 ms (993938 allocs: 92.931 MiB, 11.90% gc time)

So it is not much but there. Undraft and merge? We can add more improvements later.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants