instant team mailing list archive

["Martin Sandve Alnæs" <martinal@xxxxxxxxx>]

Have you added __hash__ and __eq__ or __cmp__ functions to your jit
object class? If not, the memory cache may not work as expected.

-- 
Martin


2008/9/11 Anders Logg <logg@xxxxxxxxx>:
> I'm still struggling with getting good performance from the in-memory
> cache in Instant.
>
> Below are the results for the JIT benchmark in bench/fem/jit in DOLFIN.
>
> When using only the caching provided by Instant, the results are
>
>  Disk cache:      0.552037000656
>  In-memory cache: 0.551201319695
>
> But when I turn on the internal FFC cache, I get
>
>  Disk cache:      0.556658029556
>  In-memory cache: 0.00709209442139
>
> The speedup is a factor 80. To run the benchmark with or without the
> FFC cache, change the variable use_ffc_cache in jit.py in FFC.
>
> I have printed out some debugging in cache.py in Instant and it seems
> that the in-memory cache is being used (not the disk cache).
>
> --
> Anders
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iD8DBQFIySAoTuwUCDsYZdERAm6dAJ9lRJinzVE8S2ywfTvXHwUYFcx/6wCfdr8B
> 1n19Q3HHv1jU/65njM0R39A=
> =PXoq
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> _______________________________________________
> Instant-dev mailing list
> Instant-dev@xxxxxxxxxx
> http://fenics.org/mailman/listinfo/instant-dev
>
>