-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
CPU crunching for more realistic algorithm #24
Conversation
Function to find the nth prime number with helpers for worker calibration
Calibration coefficient is stored on each worker and used to crunch for average runtime using prime number finder
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good 👍
I'm not sure if linear calibration with a single coefficient is always a good approximation since the density of primes is not constant. Maybe we could check how does the time vs number of iterations looks like and maybe replace single coefficient with a list and do some linear or polynomial approximation. We'd need to know a typical range of algorithm execution times - we could calculate it from ATLAS example. This'd require some more work, so I'd rather stay here with basic mechanism and if needed revise in another PR
It uses an more naive approach that is not dependent on the density of primes
Calibration now involves two parameters instead of one
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The values in 1ms - 20s range seem to have a n_max
vs time/error
BEGINRELEASENOTES
examples/schedule.jl
)ENDRELEASENOTES