[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Slowup in 2.1.54
From: |
David Bateman |
Subject: |
Re: Slowup in 2.1.54 |
Date: |
Wed, 18 Feb 2004 15:43:30 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.4.1i |
According to John W. Eaton <address@hidden> (on 02/18/04):
> On 18-Feb-2004, David Bateman <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> | So to me the problem is clearly in the concatenation operations, not
> | the recursion. Interestingly the above allows an estimate of the slowup
> | in the concatenation operation to be derived as
> |
> | (40.233 - 2.6302) / (6.1742 - 2.9223) = 11.563
> |
> | So there is a factor of roughly 11 slowup in the concatenation operations.
>
> I think the following change should help.
>
2.1.50:
tic; for n=1:1000; bm_x=sylvester_matrix(7) ; endfor ; toc
ans = 6.1763
2.1.54+patch:
tic; for n=1:1000; bm_x=sylvester_matrix(7) ; endfor ; toc
ans = 6.6461
Now I'm happy :-)
Cheers
David
--
David Bateman address@hidden
Motorola CRM +33 1 69 35 48 04 (Ph)
Parc Les Algorithmes, Commune de St Aubin +33 1 69 35 77 01 (Fax)
91193 Gif-Sur-Yvette FRANCE
The information contained in this communication has been classified as:
[x] General Business Information
[ ] Motorola Internal Use Only
[ ] Motorola Confidential Proprietary
- Slowup in 2.1.54, David Bateman, 2004/02/17
- Slowup in 2.1.54, John W. Eaton, 2004/02/17
- Re: Slowup in 2.1.54, Dmitri A. Sergatskov, 2004/02/17
- Re: Slowup in 2.1.54, Paul Thomas, 2004/02/18
- Re: Slowup in 2.1.54, John W. Eaton, 2004/02/18
- Re: Slowup in 2.1.54, Paul Thomas, 2004/02/18
- Re: Slowup in 2.1.54, John W. Eaton, 2004/02/18
- Re: Slowup in 2.1.54, David Bateman, 2004/02/18
- Re: Slowup in 2.1.54, Paul Kienzle, 2004/02/18
- Re: Slowup in 2.1.54, Daniel J Sebald, 2004/02/18
- Re: Slowup in 2.1.54, Paul Thomas, 2004/02/19
- Re: Slowup in 2.1.54, John W. Eaton, 2004/02/20
- Re: Slowup in 2.1.54, Paul Thomas, 2004/02/22