Message boards :
Application Code Discussion :
source v0.18
Message board moderation
Author | Message |
---|---|
Send message Joined: 30 Aug 07 Posts: 2046 Credit: 26,480 RAC: 0 |
Obligatory code release directory link :) Here's the thread for v0.18 source code stuff. I haven't updated it to the stock app because I'm still testing, but thought it would be a better practice to have more people be able to look at it before i update the stock app. |
Send message Joined: 22 Feb 08 Posts: 260 Credit: 57,387,048 RAC: 0 |
just tried to compile it and get this errors: ../astronomy/evaluation_state.c(230): error: class "evaluation_state" has no member "main_integral" fwrite_integral_area(file, es->main_integral); ^ ../astronomy/evaluation_state.c(231): error: class "evaluation_state" has no member "number_cuts" fprintf(file, "cuts: %d\n", es->number_cuts); ^ ../astronomy/evaluation_state.c(232): error: class "evaluation_state" has no member "number_cuts" for (i = 0; i < es->number_cuts; i++) { ^ ../astronomy/evaluation_state.c(233): error: class "evaluation_state" has no member "cuts" fwrite_integral_area(file, es->cuts[i]); ^ ../astronomy/evaluation_state.c(265): error: class "evaluation_state" has no member "main_integral" fread_integral_area(file, es->main_integral); ^ ../astronomy/evaluation_state.c(267): error: class "evaluation_state" has no member "number_cuts" fscanf(file, "cuts: %d\n", &es->number_cuts); ^ ../astronomy/evaluation_state.c(268): error: class "evaluation_state" has no member "number_cuts" for (i = 0; i < es->number_cuts; i++) { ^ ../astronomy/evaluation_state.c(269): error: class "evaluation_state" has no member "cuts" fread_integral_area(file, es->cuts[i]); ^ mic. |
Send message Joined: 30 Aug 07 Posts: 2046 Credit: 26,480 RAC: 0 |
Ohh I think I see what went on. I should have an update later tonight :) The checkpoint functions didn't get updated to the most recent version. |
Send message Joined: 30 Aug 07 Posts: 2046 Credit: 26,480 RAC: 0 |
The mw_v0.18b code should fix this problem, and it also has some additional performance improvements. |
Send message Joined: 22 Feb 08 Posts: 260 Credit: 57,387,048 RAC: 0 |
The mw_v0.18b code should fix this problem, and it also has some additional performance improvements. another one: ../searches/search_parameters.c(237): error: expected a ")" fprintf(data_file, "%s: %1.2lf\n", BOINC_APP_NAME, BOINC_APP_VERSION); ^ (the little arrow should be pointing to the B of BOINC_APP_VERSION) this same line worked fine in the pre 18 versions... mic. |
Send message Joined: 22 Feb 08 Posts: 260 Credit: 57,387,048 RAC: 0 |
...solved. I called the BOINC_APP_VERSION "0.18b", which didn't fit for the "%s: %1.2lf\n" mic. |
Send message Joined: 22 Feb 08 Posts: 260 Credit: 57,387,048 RAC: 0 |
Ok, got it compiled. But that's about it - the numbers for fitness are way out of line and wedge 86 errors out with a Floating point exception. Here are some numbers for wedge 79: reference: fitness: -2.946683357256020 (from Travis' post) v18 intel compiled: fitness: -2.993533078315163 v18 gcc compiled: fitness: -2.993533078315124 (without optimisation, used the included make.linux) Intel compiler and gcc are nearly similar, so I guess it's not the compiler... mic. |
Send message Joined: 26 Jul 08 Posts: 627 Credit: 94,940,203 RAC: 0 |
Ok, got it compiled. But that's about it - the numbers for fitness are way out of line and wedge 86 errors out with a Floating point exception. I guess, the culprit lies in the calculate_probabilities function (in evaluation_optimzed.c). In the beginning there are the lines: sinb = sin(integral_point[1] / deg); sinl = sin(integral_point[0] / deg); cosb = cos(integral_point[1] / deg); cosl = cos(integral_point[[b]1[/b]] / deg);The last line should be: cosl = cos(integral_point[0] / deg); @ Travis: This are exactly the lines I was referring to for the code change suggestion in my last PM. It should bring slightly more performance gains than what is done in the 0.18b. |
Send message Joined: 22 Feb 08 Posts: 260 Credit: 57,387,048 RAC: 0 |
I guess, the culprit lies in the calculate_probabilities function (in evaluation_optimzed.c). In the beginning there are the lines:sinb = sin(integral_point[1] / deg); sinl = sin(integral_point[0] / deg); cosb = cos(integral_point[1] / deg); cosl = cos(integral_point[[b]1[/b]] / deg);The last line should be: Nearly. The fitness is back in line, but wedge 86 still errors out. [edit]Travis, can you post reference numbers for the wedges 20/21...[/edit] mic. |
Send message Joined: 30 Aug 07 Posts: 2046 Credit: 26,480 RAC: 0 |
I'll see why 86 is giving an error. Should have what stripes 20 and 21 should be spitting out in a bit. |
Send message Joined: 30 Aug 07 Posts: 2046 Credit: 26,480 RAC: 0 |
I'll see why 86 is giving an error. Should have what stripes 20 and 21 should be spitting out in a bit. edit: I put the results for stripes 20 and 21 in the stickied "source code and sample workunits" thread. not quite sure what's up with stripe 86 but it shouldn't be too hard to track down. |
Send message Joined: 30 Aug 07 Posts: 2046 Credit: 26,480 RAC: 0 |
Ok fixed the issue with stripe 86. The astronomy-parameters-86.txt file was messed up. I put v0.18c in the code releases directory. This also fixes the cosl = cos(integral_point[1] / deg); problem. |
Send message Joined: 22 Feb 08 Posts: 260 Credit: 57,387,048 RAC: 0 |
Ok fixed the issue with stripe 86. The astronomy-parameters-86.txt file was messed up. I put v0.18c in the code releases directory. This also fixes the cosl = cos(integral_point[1] / deg); problem. Ääähhhmmm... the test-files for 20 21 and 79 seem to be exactly the same... [edit]would be nice if you could make separate archives for code and test-files, if the code changes often we don't need to dl test-files each time...[/edit] mic. |
Send message Joined: 30 Aug 07 Posts: 2046 Credit: 26,480 RAC: 0 |
wha? really? oh geez i see the problem. I cut and pasted wrong in the release script ;P OK v0.18c should be fixed with the right test files for 20 and 21 |
Send message Joined: 22 Feb 08 Posts: 260 Credit: 57,387,048 RAC: 0 |
LOL took me some time to realize why to out was way off... Already thought that glass of Lagavulin was too much... mic. |
Send message Joined: 30 Aug 07 Posts: 2046 Credit: 26,480 RAC: 0 |
LOL took me some time to realize why to out was way off... mm that's some good stuff :D but personally, my favorite is Laphroaig |
Send message Joined: 22 Feb 08 Posts: 260 Credit: 57,387,048 RAC: 0 |
LOL took me some time to realize why to out was way off... It's the Pedro Ximénez Destiller's edition... ;) I like Laphroaig too - especially the Quarter Cask. mic. |
Send message Joined: 22 Feb 08 Posts: 260 Credit: 57,387,048 RAC: 0 |
|
Send message Joined: 30 Aug 07 Posts: 2046 Credit: 26,480 RAC: 0 |
back on topic... aww. I don't suppose you noticed any performance improvement with v0.18? |
Send message Joined: 22 Feb 08 Posts: 260 Credit: 57,387,048 RAC: 0 |
not that much. about 20-30 sec faster... mic. |
©2024 Astroinformatics Group