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

Readme History/Event-based documentation is unclear #10

Open
jtramm opened this issue Aug 21, 2019 · 3 comments
Open

Readme History/Event-based documentation is unclear #10

jtramm opened this issue Aug 21, 2019 · 3 comments

Comments

@jtramm
Copy link
Contributor

jtramm commented Aug 21, 2019

Currently the history and event-based documentation in the readme is very terse. It is currently describing the differences in history vs. event-based for a full MC application, but does not describe how this is represented in XSBench. Need to add a pseudo code for event-based XSBench itself, and how this relates to the full application.

@williamfgc
Copy link

@jtramm thanks, I came across this. In particular, it's clear how history computation workloads will scale up with -p particles, but not in the event-based case. Is there an equivalent way to do the same in event-based? Asking as I'm studying workloads on GPU and event-based is the only supported mode due to its SIMD formulation. Any help is appreciated.

@jtramm
Copy link
Contributor Author

jtramm commented Feb 21, 2022

Thanks for the reminder on this! Yes, we still need better documentation on this front. For the time being, you can increase the program runtime in event-based mode by increasing the number of lookups with the -l argument.

@williamfgc
Copy link

@jtramm thanks for the response. I can confirm I can increase the program runtime on Crusher, up to 2.2B lookups after that it dies. I'll open a new issue.

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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants