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

improve performance of kernel(::SchoenbergQuarticSplineKernel, r, h) #253

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

ranocha
Copy link
Member

@ranocha ranocha commented Oct 25, 2023

Continuing a discussion with @efaulhaber on Slack - here is the code of kernel7 I mentioned on Slack. Feel free to use this and adapt the other kernels accordingly.

@ranocha ranocha requested a review from efaulhaber October 25, 2023 14:57
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Oct 25, 2023

Codecov Report

Attention: 10 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Comparison is base (b6f8710) 57.28% compared to head (facba89) 57.28%.
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main     #253   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   57.28%   57.28%           
=======================================
  Files          55       55           
  Lines        2943     2943           
=======================================
  Hits         1686     1686           
  Misses       1257     1257           
Flag Coverage Δ
unit 57.28% <65.51%> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Files Coverage Δ
src/TrixiParticles.jl 100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/schemes/solid/total_lagrangian_sph/system.jl 75.43% <100.00%> (-1.93%) ⬇️
src/general/corrections.jl 29.87% <94.73%> (+21.24%) ⬆️
src/general/smoothing_kernels.jl 30.26% <0.00%> (ø)

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@ranocha
Copy link
Member Author

ranocha commented Oct 26, 2023

As I said on Slack, this gives slightly different results since it uses another algorithm that is slightly less accurate but much faster. I leave it up to you to evaluate it for your needs - and adapt other parts accordingly.

I do not understand the comment above completely - and I don't know which version of the other PR you have used. Anyway, if you include optimizations like the ones I suggested here, I strongly suggest to include the comments explaining why these changes are made as well.

@svchb
Copy link
Collaborator

svchb commented Oct 27, 2023

Closed as the other PR has been merged.

@svchb svchb closed this Oct 27, 2023
@efaulhaber efaulhaber deleted the hr/performance branch January 10, 2024 13:35
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants