Services & Resources / Wolfram Forums / MathGroup Archive
-----

MathGroup Archive 2012

[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]

Search the Archive

Re: much power to mathematica

  • To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
  • Subject: [mg125368] Re: much power to mathematica
  • From: David Bailey <dave at removedbailey.co.uk>
  • Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2012 06:14:50 -0500 (EST)
  • Delivered-to: l-mathgroup@mail-archive0.wolfram.com
  • References: <jj4qn7$ifa$1@smc.vnet.net> <15040062.90100.1331201203073.JavaMail.root@m06> <jjcob0$q6e$1@smc.vnet.net>

On 09/03/2012 11:08, djmpark wrote:
> David,
>
> There is a case where parallel processing will give a gain much greater than
> the number of cores used! This is when breaking a complicated graphic, say a
> contour or density plot, into multiple pieces.
>
> If you have to use 200 x 200 PlotPoints for a regular plot, then you can
> break it into four 100 x 100 plots for the same resolution. You obtain the
> approximate factor of 4 but also much faster execution because you are using
> only 1/4 the PlotPoints for each plot. There might also be some improvement
> with MaxRecursion, because each plot is simpler.
>
> I've found that the easiest way to understand and use parallel processing is
> to learn about and use ParallelSubmit and WaitAll.
>
>
David,

Wouldn't that imply that the plotting process could be speeded up anyway 
be splitting it up into smaller pieces?

Also, I imagine that the contour plot must deteriorate if constructed in 
this way - contours not joining across the borders, etc. I mean the 
parallel computation isn't computing the same result as the original 
sequential one.

David Bailey
http://www.dbaileyconsultancy.co.uk




  • Prev by Date: Re: new functional operator
  • Next by Date: Re: new functional operator
  • Previous by thread: Re: much power to mathematica
  • Next by thread: Re: much power to mathematica