RE [Paraview] StreamTracing Tester/Guinea Pig(s) wanted

[Stephane PLOIX]

Hi John,

Do you have an easy way to measure the performance in ParaView ? (is there 
a way to set up a timer? )
By the way, I had another question on stream tracing : do you know why 
can't we use cell-based velocity field for stream tracing ? 

SP

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stéphane Ploix
EDF R&D 
1 avenue du Général de Gaulle
F-92141 Clamart Cedex
Phone : +33 (0)1 47 65 51 10
Email : stephane.ploix 'at' edf.fr



paraview-bounces+stephane.ploix=edf.fr at paraview.org 
29/02/2008 14:08

A
paraview at paraview.org, vtkusers at vtk.org
cc

Objet
[Paraview] StreamTracing Tester/Guinea Pig(s) wanted






Hello all,

I've been making some changes to the caching/interpolation used in 
vtkStreamTracer and mostly vtkInterpolatedVelocityField - which I hope 
will give a performance increase - but I have tweaked so many things over 
a relatively long period, that I'm not entirely confident of benchmarks - 
and to be honest I don't want to spend the time setting up a series of 
(rigorous) tests to confim anything.
Other groups have also compared Ensight Streamline generation performance 
to ParaView and found between 2x and 8x performance difference between the 
two packages. 

Is there anyone out there that can help me out, by doing the following 
1) Use a Release build of CVS head paraview or raw VTK C++ (from very 
recently - or now)
2) To generate streamlines on the biggest data they generally work with. 
 The more cells and the more multiblock datasets the better as my caching 
is partly aimed at multiblock improvements. One addition is the ability to 
use a locator for initial seeding. This adds a few seconds to the 
initialization - but improves performcnce when injecting many seeds.
3) Provide a couple of timing benchmarks which are
 a) A large number of relatively small streamlines (where Injection of the 
initial seed points has a big impact on the calculation)
 b) A large-or-small number of long streamlines on big datasets where the 
streamlines pass through many blocks of multiblock data - the inner loop 
velocity interpolation generally dominates when the integration produces 
long streamlines.
4) Compare the perfomance with a similar/identical streamline generation 
in Ensight (optional request, if you can that'd be great)

5) Do a cvs update after I commit some changes and rebuild paraview with 
exactly the same settings for release/optimization etc
6) Re run identical tests which will show if the changes have made any 
difference.
7) The tester should be reasonably familar with all the parameters that 
can be tweaked in the vtkStreamline module so that they can tune the test 
so that it is realistic.
8) The tester(s) should be able to set up a test without help - I'd hope 
that if someone can dedicate an hour or so to testing before CVS commits 
and then a short time after updating from cvs (assuming test is now setup 
and needs no adjustment) that they will require no help from me.

the fixes I have made are mostly for the benefit of the ParticleTracer 
module, but in the process I have made some tweaks which should help the 
Streamline module too. I'm keen to find out if they really have made any 
difference (5% or 50% - I have no idea?) . If ParaView can compete with 
Ensight, that'd also be useful to know. It may be a week or more before I 
check in my stuff as I have to synchonize my code with the 
multiblock/composite changes of a few weeks back, but if a handful of 
people can do tests this week and then again in a week or so, that'd be 
great.

Thanks in advance

JB
-- 
John Biddiscombe,                            email:biddisco @ cscs.ch
http://www.cscs.ch/about/BJohn.php
CSCS, Swiss National Supercomputing Centre  | Tel:  +41 (91) 610.82.07
Via Cantonale, 6928 Manno, Switzerland      | Fax:  +41 (91) 610.82.82
_______________________________________________
ParaView mailing list
ParaView at paraview.org
http://www.paraview.org/mailman/listinfo/paraview

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://public.kitware.com/pipermail/paraview/attachments/20080229/f29fca7d/attachment.html