Commit ada8fe0d by FritzFlorian

Add Performance notes on using ONLY fork_join tasks.

parent 14a5ddfb
Pipeline #1166 passed with stages
in 3 minutes 40 seconds
...@@ -66,3 +66,23 @@ Additionaly, the first one uses our high level API (parallel invoke), ...@@ -66,3 +66,23 @@ Additionaly, the first one uses our high level API (parallel invoke),
while the second one uses our low level API. while the second one uses our low level API.
It is worth investigating if either or high level API or the structure It is worth investigating if either or high level API or the structure
of the memory access in FFT are the problem. of the memory access in FFT are the problem.
### Commit cf056856 - Remove two-level scheduler
In this test we replace the two level scheduler with ONLY fork_join
tasks. This removes the top level steal overhead and performs only
internal stealing. For this we set the fork_join task as the only
possible task type and removed the top level rw-lock, the digging
down to our level and solely use internal stealing.
Average results FFT:
<img src="media/cf056856_fft_average.png" width="600"/>
Average results Unbalanced:
<img src="media/cf056856_unbalanced_average.png" width="600"/>
There seems to be only a minor performance difference between the two,
suggesting tha our two-level approach is not the part causing our
weaker performance.
Markdown is supported
0% or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or sign in to comment