[petsc-users] Performance of Conda Binary vs Self Compiled Version

[Matthew Knepley]

On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 3:54 PM Jorge Nin <jorgenin at mit.edu> wrote:

> Hi,
> I was playing around with a self compiled version and, and a the Conda
> binary of Petsc on the same problem, on my M1 Mac.
> Interestingly I found that the Conda binary solves the problem 2-3 times
> slower vs the self compiled version. (For context I’m using the petsc4py
> python interface)
>
> I’ve attached two log views to show the comparison.
>
> I was mostly curious about the possible cause for this.
>

All the time is in the LU numeric factorization. I don't know if your
matrix is sparse or dense. I am guessing it is dense and different LAPACK
implementations are linked. If it is sparse, then the compiler options are
different between builds, but I would be surprised if it made this much
difference.

  Thanks,

     Matt


>  I was also curious how I could use my own compiled version of PETSc in my
> Conda install?
>
>
> Best,
> Jorge
>
>

-- 
What most experimenters take for granted before they begin their
experiments is infinitely more interesting than any results to which their
experiments lead.
-- Norbert Wiener

https://www.cse.buffalo.edu/~knepley/ <http://www.cse.buffalo.edu/~knepley/>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20231019/f41defff/attachment.html>