Skip to content
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

Update benchmarking docs #1849

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Feb 22, 2024
Merged

Update benchmarking docs #1849

merged 3 commits into from
Feb 22, 2024

Conversation

ranocha
Copy link
Member

@ranocha ranocha commented Feb 21, 2024

I made some changes to the benchmarking setups (which were bit-rotten...). This fix should document the necessary steps to benchmark a PR. Please let me know if this works for you, @DanielDoehring

@ranocha ranocha added the documentation Improvements or additions to documentation label Feb 21, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

Review checklist

This checklist is meant to assist creators of PRs (to let them know what reviewers will typically look for) and reviewers (to guide them in a structured review process). Items do not need to be checked explicitly for a PR to be eligible for merging.

Purpose and scope

  • The PR has a single goal that is clear from the PR title and/or description.
  • All code changes represent a single set of modifications that logically belong together.
  • No more than 500 lines of code are changed or there is no obvious way to split the PR into multiple PRs.

Code quality

  • The code can be understood easily.
  • Newly introduced names for variables etc. are self-descriptive and consistent with existing naming conventions.
  • There are no redundancies that can be removed by simple modularization/refactoring.
  • There are no leftover debug statements or commented code sections.
  • The code adheres to our conventions and style guide, and to the Julia guidelines.

Documentation

  • New functions and types are documented with a docstring or top-level comment.
  • Relevant publications are referenced in docstrings (see example for formatting).
  • Inline comments are used to document longer or unusual code sections.
  • Comments describe intent ("why?") and not just functionality ("what?").
  • If the PR introduces a significant change or new feature, it is documented in NEWS.md.

Testing

  • The PR passes all tests.
  • New or modified lines of code are covered by tests.
  • New or modified tests run in less then 10 seconds.

Performance

  • There are no type instabilities or memory allocations in performance-critical parts.
  • If the PR intent is to improve performance, before/after time measurements are posted in the PR.

Verification

  • The correctness of the code was verified using appropriate tests.
  • If new equations/methods are added, a convergence test has been run and the results
    are posted in the PR.

Created with ❤️ by the Trixi.jl community.

@DanielDoehring
Copy link
Contributor

Just submitted a run on julia 1.9.4 , let's see if this runs smoothly.

Copy link
Contributor

@DanielDoehring DanielDoehring left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for the update, this works now!


I added this information on RAM since one of my first runs crashed due to too little RAM allowed for each thread.
I think this is valuable information for anyone using this benchmarking in conjunction with a workload manager such as SLURM.

docs/src/performance.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Co-authored-by: Daniel Doehring <[email protected]>
@ranocha
Copy link
Member Author

ranocha commented Feb 22, 2024

Great, thanks!

@ranocha ranocha merged commit 88e4a09 into main Feb 22, 2024
6 checks passed
@ranocha ranocha deleted the ranocha-patch-2 branch February 22, 2024 12:49
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
documentation Improvements or additions to documentation
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants