[Scilab-users] Scilab 6.1 too slow to list large vectors

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
12 messages Options
fmiyara fmiyara
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[Scilab-users] Scilab 6.1 too slow to list large vectors


Dear All,

I have observed that Scilab 6.1 seems to have a regression respect to 6.0.2. Sometimes one forgets to put semicolon after the coputation of a vector with tens of thousands components. Scilab 6.0.2 listed all the components very fast. That was nice because one hadn't to cancel the computation, it took about 1 s. With 6.1 it takes much longer. For instance

Fs = 44100
T = 2.5
t = [0:T*Fs]/Fs;
ximp = exp(-t/0.3).*rand(t,"normal") + 0.004*rand(t,"normal");

tic
ximp = ximp(:)
toc

This takes 1.36 s in 6.0.2

The same code in 6.1 takes 182 s

Any idea why?

I know I can cancel at any moment the script execution, but if there were a process that took a lot of time one wouldn't be willing to stop it...

Regards,

Federico Miyara
 

_______________________________________________
users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.scilab.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Antoine Monmayrant-2 Antoine Monmayrant-2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ?==?utf-8?q? Scilab 6.1 too slow to list large vectors

Hello Frederico,

I can confirm this (6.0.2 vs 6.1) on linux Ubuntu 18.04 64bits:

 6.0.2 -> ~1s
 6.1.0 -> ~50s

Could you fill a bug report?

Antoine
 
 
Le Lundi, Mars 30, 2020 11:56 CEST, Federico Miyara <[hidden email]> a écrit:
 

>
> Dear All,
>
> I have observed that Scilab 6.1 seems to have a regression respect to
> 6.0.2. Sometimes one forgets to put semicolon after the coputation of a
> vector with tens of thousands components. Scilab 6.0.2 listed all the
> components very fast. That was nice because one hadn't to cancel the
> computation, it took about 1 s. With 6.1 it takes much longer. For instance
>
> Fs  =  44100
> T  =  2.5
> t  =  [0:T*Fs]/Fs;
> ximp  =  exp(-t/0.3).*rand(t,"normal")  +  0.004*rand(t,"normal");
>
> tic
> ximp  =  ximp(:)
> toc
>
> This takes 1.36 s in 6.0.2
>
> The same code in 6.1 takes 182 s
>
> Any idea why?
>
> I know I can cancel at any moment the script execution, but if there
> were a process that took a lot of time one wouldn't be willing to stop it...
>
> Regards,
>
> Federico Miyara

_______________________________________________
users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.scilab.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Antoine Monmayrant-2 Antoine Monmayrant-2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ?==?utf-8?q? Scilab 6.1 too slow to list large vectors

In reply to this post by fmiyara
Hi again,

Just tested using the cli (no window, no java): it's even more : 0.34s vs 46s.

Antoine
 
 
Le Lundi, Mars 30, 2020 11:56 CEST, Federico Miyara <[hidden email]> a écrit:
 

>
> Dear All,
>
> I have observed that Scilab 6.1 seems to have a regression respect to
> 6.0.2. Sometimes one forgets to put semicolon after the coputation of a
> vector with tens of thousands components. Scilab 6.0.2 listed all the
> components very fast. That was nice because one hadn't to cancel the
> computation, it took about 1 s. With 6.1 it takes much longer. For instance
>
> Fs  =  44100
> T  =  2.5
> t  =  [0:T*Fs]/Fs;
> ximp  =  exp(-t/0.3).*rand(t,"normal")  +  0.004*rand(t,"normal");
>
> tic
> ximp  =  ximp(:)
> toc
>
> This takes 1.36 s in 6.0.2
>
> The same code in 6.1 takes 182 s
>
> Any idea why?
>
> I know I can cancel at any moment the script execution, but if there
> were a process that took a lot of time one wouldn't be willing to stop it...
>
> Regards,
>
> Federico Miyara

_______________________________________________
users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.scilab.org/mailman/listinfo/users
fmiyara fmiyara
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ?==?utf-8?q? Scilab 6.1 too slow to list large vectors

In reply to this post by Antoine Monmayrant-2

Antoine,

Thank you for testing. I have filed bug 16397:

https://bugzilla.scilab.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16397

Regards,

Federico Miyara


On 30/03/2020 09:05, Antoine Monmayrant wrote:

> Hello Frederico,
>
> I can confirm this (6.0.2 vs 6.1) on linux Ubuntu 18.04 64bits:
>
>   6.0.2 -> ~1s
>   6.1.0 -> ~50s
>
> Could you fill a bug report?
>
> Antoine
>  
>  
> Le Lundi, Mars 30, 2020 11:56 CEST, Federico Miyara <[hidden email]> a écrit:
>  
>> Dear All,
>>
>> I have observed that Scilab 6.1 seems to have a regression respect to
>> 6.0.2. Sometimes one forgets to put semicolon after the coputation of a
>> vector with tens of thousands components. Scilab 6.0.2 listed all the
>> components very fast. That was nice because one hadn't to cancel the
>> computation, it took about 1 s. With 6.1 it takes much longer. For instance
>>
>> Fs  =  44100
>> T  =  2.5
>> t  =  [0:T*Fs]/Fs;
>> ximp  =  exp(-t/0.3).*rand(t,"normal")  +  0.004*rand(t,"normal");
>>
>> tic
>> ximp  =  ximp(:)
>> toc
>>
>> This takes 1.36 s in 6.0.2
>>
>> The same code in 6.1 takes 182 s
>>
>> Any idea why?
>>
>> I know I can cancel at any moment the script execution, but if there
>> were a process that took a lot of time one wouldn't be willing to stop it...
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Federico Miyara
> _______________________________________________
> users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.scilab.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>
>

_______________________________________________
users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.scilab.org/mailman/listinfo/users
mottelet mottelet
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Scilab 6.1 too slow to list large vectors

In reply to this post by fmiyara

Hi Frederico,

Thanks for reporting. Can you test if the regression also holds for matrices ?

S.

Le 30/03/2020 à 11:56, Federico Miyara a écrit :

Fs = 44100
T = 2.5
t = [0:T*Fs]/Fs;
ximp = exp(-t/0.3).*rand(t,"normal") + 0.004*rand(t,"normal");

tic
ximp = ximp(:)
toc

-- 
Stéphane Mottelet
Ingénieur de recherche
EA 4297 Transformations Intégrées de la Matière Renouvelable
Département Génie des Procédés Industriels
Sorbonne Universités - Université de Technologie de Compiègne
CS 60319, 60203 Compiègne cedex
Tel : +33(0)344234688
http://www.utc.fr/~mottelet

_______________________________________________
users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.scilab.org/mailman/listinfo/users
fmiyara fmiyara
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Scilab 6.1 too slow to list large vectors


Stéphane,

I simplified and diversified the test:

tic
u = rand(100,1000)
toc

takes
16 s in 6.1
10 s in 6.0.2

tic
u = u(:)'
toc

takes
66 s in 6.1
1.29 s in 6.0.2

tic
u = u(:)
toc

takes
107 s in 6.1
1.52 s in 6.0.2

tic
u = matrix(u,1000,100)
toc

takes
16 s in 6.1
10 s in 6.0.2

tic
u = matrix(u,100, 100, 10)
toc

takes
0.5 s in 6.1
0.5 s in 6.0.2

Seems as if vertical (many line feeds) print took more time than horizontal print.

Regards,

Federico Miyara



On 31/03/2020 05:23, Stéphane Mottelet wrote:

Hi Frederico,

Thanks for reporting. Can you test if the regression also holds for matrices ?

S.

Le 30/03/2020 à 11:56, Federico Miyara a écrit :

Fs = 44100
T = 2.5
t = [0:T*Fs]/Fs;
ximp = exp(-t/0.3).*rand(t,"normal") + 0.004*rand(t,"normal");

tic
ximp = ximp(:)
toc

-- 
Stéphane Mottelet
Ingénieur de recherche
EA 4297 Transformations Intégrées de la Matière Renouvelable
Département Génie des Procédés Industriels
Sorbonne Universités - Université de Technologie de Compiègne
CS 60319, 60203 Compiègne cedex
Tel : +33(0)344234688
http://www.utc.fr/~mottelet

_______________________________________________
users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.scilab.org/mailman/listinfo/users


_______________________________________________
users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.scilab.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Antoine Monmayrant-2 Antoine Monmayrant-2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ?==?utf-8?q? Scilab 6.1 too slow to list large vectors

Hello,

I also ran some tests and it seems that the regression is clearly line-based: ie the regression is worse for vector than for matrix because there more lines to print to display a vector than a matrix of similar length.
See my test code below.


n1=300;
n2=100;
mat=rand(n1,n2);
tn=[];

/* Ctrl+E the code below several times*/

tic
mat // matrix
//mat(:) // vector
t=toc()
tn=[tn,t];

disp('---------')
disp('N_run = '+string(length(tn)))
disp('T='+string(mean(tn))+'+/-'+string(stdev(tn)));


/*
6.0.2 matrix
N_run = 20
T=0.6392742+/-0.056698
1.6x slower  but plotting 4 values per line ie 4x less lines to plot than for the matrix version

6.1.0 matrix
N_run = 10
T=1.0335109+/-0.0317414

6.0.2 vector mat(:)
N_run = 20
T=0.4943449+/-0.0662727

6.1.0 vector mat(:)
N_run = 10
T=3.800698+/-0.1121251
7.7x slower ie same slow down per line than for the vector version as we plot 4 values per line so 4x more lines

*/
 
 
 
Le Mardi, Mars 31, 2020 11:36 CEST, Federico Miyara <[hidden email]> a écrit:
 

>
> Stéphane,
>
> I simplified and diversified the test:
>
> tic
> u = rand(100,1000)
> toc
>
> takes
> 16 s in 6.1
> 10 s in 6.0.2
>
> tic
> u = u(:)'
> toc
>
> takes
> 66 s in 6.1
> 1.29 s in 6.0.2
>
> tic
> u = u(:)
> toc
>
> takes
> 107 s in 6.1
> 1.52 s in 6.0.2
>
> tic
> u = matrix(u,1000,100)
> toc
>
> takes
> 16 s in 6.1
> 10 s in 6.0.2
>
> tic
> u = matrix(u,100, 100, 10)
> toc
>
> takes
> 0.5 s in 6.1
> 0.5 s in 6.0.2
>
> Seems as if vertical (many line feeds) print took more time than
> horizontal print.
>
> Regards,
>
> Federico Miyara
>
>
>
> On 31/03/2020 05:23, Stéphane Mottelet wrote:
> >
> > Hi Frederico,
> >
> > Thanks for reporting. Can you test if the regression also holds for
> > matrices ?
> >
> > S.
> >
> > Le 30/03/2020 à 11:56, Federico Miyara a écrit :
> >>
> >> Fs  =  44100
> >> T  =  2.5
> >> t  =  [0:T*Fs]/Fs;
> >> ximp  =  exp(-t/0.3).*rand(t,"normal")  +  0.004*rand(t,"normal");
> >>
> >> tic
> >> ximp  =  ximp(:)
> >> toc
> > --
> > Stéphane Mottelet
> > Ingénieur de recherche
> > EA 4297 Transformations Intégrées de la Matière Renouvelable
> > Département Génie des Procédés Industriels
> > Sorbonne Universités - Université de Technologie de Compiègne
> > CS 60319, 60203 Compiègne cedex
> > Tel : +33(0)344234688
> > http://www.utc.fr/~mottelet
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > users mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > http://lists.scilab.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>

_______________________________________________
users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.scilab.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Heinz Nabielek-3 Heinz Nabielek-3
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Scilab 6.1 too slow to list large vectors

In reply to this post by fmiyara
On my  iMac macOS Catalina 10.15.3
 Processor Name: Quad-Core Intel Core i7
  Processor Speed: 3.1 GHz
Darwin Kernel Version 19.3.0: Thu Jan  9 20:58:23 PST 2020; root:xnu-6153.81.5~1/RELEASE_X86_64 x86_64
Should anybody be interested....
Heinz


   2.107417
   0.564745

tic
u = u(:)
toc
   0.557869

tic
u = matrix(u,1000,100)
toc
   2.194178


tic
u = matrix(u,100, 100, 10)
toc
   0.069732


> On 31.03.2020, at 11:36, Federico Miyara <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>
> Stéphane,
>
> I simplified and diversified the test:
>
> tic
> u = rand(100,1000)
> toc
>
> takes
> 16 s in 6.1
> 10 s in 6.0.2
>
> tic
> u = u(:)'
> toc
>
> takes
> 66 s in 6.1
> 1.29 s in 6.0.2
>
> tic
> u = u(:)
> toc
>
> takes
> 107 s in 6.1
> 1.52 s in 6.0.2
>
> tic
> u = matrix(u,1000,100)
> toc
>
> takes
> 16 s in 6.1
> 10 s in 6.0.2
>
> tic
> u = matrix(u,100, 100, 10)
> toc
>
> takes
> 0.5 s in 6.1
> 0.5 s in 6.0.2
>
> Seems as if vertical (many line feeds) print took more time than horizontal print.
>
> Regards,
>
> Federico Miyara
>
>
>
> On 31/03/2020 05:23, Stéphane Mottelet wrote:
>> Hi Frederico,
>>
>> Thanks for reporting. Can you test if the regression also holds for matrices ?
>>
>> S.
>>
>> Le 30/03/2020 à 11:56, Federico Miyara a écrit :
>>>
>>>  Fs = 44100
>>> T = 2.5
>>> t = [0:T*Fs]/Fs;
>>> ximp = exp(-t/0.3).*rand(t,"normal") + 0.004*rand(t,"normal");
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> tic
>>> ximp = ximp(:)
>>> toc
>>>
>>>

_______________________________________________
users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.scilab.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Perrichon Perrichon
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ?==?utf-8?q? Scilab 6.1 too slow to list large vectors

In reply to this post by Antoine Monmayrant-2
Hello,

On another way, see bugzilla #16359 in Xcos

I've provided the program to ESI

Results :
Xcos Scilab 5.5.2 :
Durée de la simulation : 258.3 s

Xcos Sciab 6.1.0 :
Durée de la simulation : 4353.4 s

Stack? Mallloc ?

Regards



Before printing, think about ENVIRONMENTAL responsabity


-----Message d'origine-----
De : users <[hidden email]> De la part de Antoine Monmayrant
Envoyé : mardi 31 mars 2020 11:55
À : Users mailing list for Scilab <[hidden email]>
Objet : Re: [Scilab-users] ?==?utf-8?q? Scilab 6.1 too slow to list large vectors

Hello,

I also ran some tests and it seems that the regression is clearly line-based: ie the regression is worse for vector than for matrix because there more lines to print to display a vector than a matrix of similar length.
See my test code below.


n1=300;
n2=100;
mat=rand(n1,n2);
tn=[];

/* Ctrl+E the code below several times*/

tic
mat // matrix
//mat(:) // vector
t=toc()
tn=[tn,t];

disp('---------')
disp('N_run = '+string(length(tn)))
disp('T='+string(mean(tn))+'+/-'+string(stdev(tn)));


/*
6.0.2 matrix
N_run = 20
T=0.6392742+/-0.056698
1.6x slower  but plotting 4 values per line ie 4x less lines to plot than for the matrix version

6.1.0 matrix
N_run = 10
T=1.0335109+/-0.0317414

6.0.2 vector mat(:)
N_run = 20
T=0.4943449+/-0.0662727

6.1.0 vector mat(:)
N_run = 10
T=3.800698+/-0.1121251
7.7x slower ie same slow down per line than for the vector version as we plot 4 values per line so 4x more lines

*/
 
 
 
Le Mardi, Mars 31, 2020 11:36 CEST, Federico Miyara <[hidden email]> a écrit:
 

>
> Stéphane,
>
> I simplified and diversified the test:
>
> tic
> u = rand(100,1000)
> toc
>
> takes
> 16 s in 6.1
> 10 s in 6.0.2
>
> tic
> u = u(:)'
> toc
>
> takes
> 66 s in 6.1
> 1.29 s in 6.0.2
>
> tic
> u = u(:)
> toc
>
> takes
> 107 s in 6.1
> 1.52 s in 6.0.2
>
> tic
> u = matrix(u,1000,100)
> toc
>
> takes
> 16 s in 6.1
> 10 s in 6.0.2
>
> tic
> u = matrix(u,100, 100, 10)
> toc
>
> takes
> 0.5 s in 6.1
> 0.5 s in 6.0.2
>
> Seems as if vertical (many line feeds) print took more time than
> horizontal print.
>
> Regards,
>
> Federico Miyara
>
>
>
> On 31/03/2020 05:23, Stéphane Mottelet wrote:
> >
> > Hi Frederico,
> >
> > Thanks for reporting. Can you test if the regression also holds for
> > matrices ?
> >
> > S.
> >
> > Le 30/03/2020 à 11:56, Federico Miyara a écrit :
> >>
> >> Fs  =  44100
> >> T  =  2.5
> >> t  =  [0:T*Fs]/Fs;
> >> ximp  =  exp(-t/0.3).*rand(t,"normal")  +  0.004*rand(t,"normal");
> >>
> >> tic
> >> ximp  =  ximp(:)
> >> toc
> > --
> > Stéphane Mottelet
> > Ingénieur de recherche
> > EA 4297 Transformations Intégrées de la Matière Renouvelable
> > Département Génie des Procédés Industriels Sorbonne Universités -
> > Université de Technologie de Compiègne CS 60319, 60203 Compiègne
> > cedex Tel : +33(0)344234688 http://www.utc.fr/~mottelet
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > users mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > http://lists.scilab.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>

_______________________________________________
users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.scilab.org/mailman/listinfo/users

_______________________________________________
users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.scilab.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Clément David-3 Clément David-3
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ?==?utf-8?q? Scilab 6.1 too slow to list large vectors

Hello Pierre,

FYI your reported issue is probably not related at all to the matrix printing in the console. The Xcos simulation engine is kind of a gateway from the Scilab interpreter point of view (like optim() for instance), let's keep them separate issues.

Thanks,

--
Clément

> -----Original Message-----
> From: users <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Perrichon
> Sent: Tuesday, March 31, 2020 12:05 PM
> To: 'Users mailing list for Scilab' <[hidden email]>
> Subject: Re: [Scilab-users] ?==?utf-8?q? Scilab 6.1 too slow to list large vectors
>
> Hello,
>
> On another way, see bugzilla #16359 in Xcos
>
> I've provided the program to ESI
>
> Results :
> Xcos Scilab 5.5.2 :
> Durée de la simulation : 258.3 s
>
> Xcos Sciab 6.1.0 :
> Durée de la simulation : 4353.4 s
>
> Stack? Mallloc ?
>
> Regards
>
>
>
> Before printing, think about ENVIRONMENTAL responsabity
>
>
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : users <[hidden email]> De la part de Antoine Monmayrant
> Envoyé : mardi 31 mars 2020 11:55 À : Users mailing list for Scilab
> <[hidden email]> Objet : Re: [Scilab-users] ?==?utf-8?q? Scilab 6.1 too
> slow to list large vectors
>
> Hello,
>
> I also ran some tests and it seems that the regression is clearly line-based: ie the
> regression is worse for vector than for matrix because there more lines to print
> to display a vector than a matrix of similar length.
> See my test code below.
>
>
> n1=300;
> n2=100;
> mat=rand(n1,n2);
> tn=[];
>
> /* Ctrl+E the code below several times*/
>
> tic
> mat // matrix
> //mat(:) // vector
> t=toc()
> tn=[tn,t];
>
> disp('---------')
> disp('N_run = '+string(length(tn)))
> disp('T='+string(mean(tn))+'+/-'+string(stdev(tn)));
>
>
> /*
> 6.0.2 matrix
> N_run = 20
> T=0.6392742+/-0.056698
> 1.6x slower  but plotting 4 values per line ie 4x less lines to plot than for the
> matrix version
>
> 6.1.0 matrix
> N_run = 10
> T=1.0335109+/-0.0317414
>
> 6.0.2 vector mat(:)
> N_run = 20
> T=0.4943449+/-0.0662727
>
> 6.1.0 vector mat(:)
> N_run = 10
> T=3.800698+/-0.1121251
> 7.7x slower ie same slow down per line than for the vector version as we plot 4
> values per line so 4x more lines
>
> */
>
>
>
> Le Mardi, Mars 31, 2020 11:36 CEST, Federico Miyara
> <[hidden email]> a écrit:
>
> >
> > Stéphane,
> >
> > I simplified and diversified the test:
> >
> > tic
> > u = rand(100,1000)
> > toc
> >
> > takes
> > 16 s in 6.1
> > 10 s in 6.0.2
> >
> > tic
> > u = u(:)'
> > toc
> >
> > takes
> > 66 s in 6.1
> > 1.29 s in 6.0.2
> >
> > tic
> > u = u(:)
> > toc
> >
> > takes
> > 107 s in 6.1
> > 1.52 s in 6.0.2
> >
> > tic
> > u = matrix(u,1000,100)
> > toc
> >
> > takes
> > 16 s in 6.1
> > 10 s in 6.0.2
> >
> > tic
> > u = matrix(u,100, 100, 10)
> > toc
> >
> > takes
> > 0.5 s in 6.1
> > 0.5 s in 6.0.2
> >
> > Seems as if vertical (many line feeds) print took more time than
> > horizontal print.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Federico Miyara
> >
> >
> >
> > On 31/03/2020 05:23, Stéphane Mottelet wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Frederico,
> > >
> > > Thanks for reporting. Can you test if the regression also holds for
> > > matrices ?
> > >
> > > S.
> > >
> > > Le 30/03/2020 à 11:56, Federico Miyara a écrit :
> > >>
> > >> Fs  =  44100
> > >> T  =  2.5
> > >> t  =  [0:T*Fs]/Fs;
> > >> ximp  =  exp(-t/0.3).*rand(t,"normal")  +  0.004*rand(t,"normal");
> > >>
> > >> tic
> > >> ximp  =  ximp(:)
> > >> toc
> > > --
> > > Stéphane Mottelet
> > > Ingénieur de recherche
> > > EA 4297 Transformations Intégrées de la Matière Renouvelable
> > > Département Génie des Procédés Industriels Sorbonne Universités -
> > > Université de Technologie de Compiègne CS 60319, 60203 Compiègne
> > > cedex Tel : +33(0)344234688 http://www.utc.fr/~mottelet
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > users mailing list
> > > [hidden email]
> > > http://lists.scilab.org/mailman/listinfo/users
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.scilab.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>
> _______________________________________________
> users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.scilab.org/mailman/listinfo/users
_______________________________________________
users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.scilab.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Samuel GOUGEON Samuel GOUGEON
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Scilab 6.1 too slow to list large vectors

In reply to this post by fmiyara
Le 30/03/2020 à 11:56, Federico Miyara a écrit :

Dear All,

I have observed that Scilab 6.1 seems to have a regression respect to 6.0.2. Sometimes one forgets to put semicolon after the coputation of a vector with tens of thousands components. Scilab 6.0.2 listed all the components very fast. That was nice because one hadn't to cancel the computation, it took about 1 s. With 6.1 it takes much longer. For instance

Fs = 44100
T = 2.5
t = [0:T*Fs]/Fs;
ximp = exp(-t/0.3).*rand(t,"normal") + 0.004*rand(t,"normal");

tic
ximp = ximp(:)
toc

This takes 1.36 s in 6.0.2

The same code in 6.1 takes 182 s

Any idea why?

I know I can cancel at any moment the script execution, but if there were a process that took a lot of time one wouldn't be willing to stop it...


Apparently, the maximum number N of lines of the console scroll buffer set in the user preferences (by default to 3000) is not taken into account to abstract the display in this kind of situation. Is it?

Yet, if there is no opened diary, displaying 100000 "primary" rows looks 97% useless if the scroll buffer is 3000-row tall: 97000 rows will anyway become unreachable an lost, after the full display.

So, even without anticipating wrapping of long primary rows, that still multiplies the number of actual rows to display, wouldn't it be wise to limit the display to N primary lines, either the N last ones, or the N/2 first ones + "..." + the N/2 last ones ?

Even in the case of having so tall full diaries is required (that is a very specific and exceptional case), it is always possible to increase N through the preferences.

My two cents...

Samuel




_______________________________________________
users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.scilab.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Perrichon Perrichon
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Scilab 6.1 too slow to list large vectors

Hello,

 

See also bugzilla  Scilab's Bug Tracker – Bug 16359

 

 

Time request : 100 s

 

Results :

Xcos Scilab 5.5.2 :

Durée de la simulation : 258.3 s

 

Xcos Scilab 6.1.0 :

Durée de la simulation : 4353.4 s

 

BR.

Pierre

 

 

Before printing, think about ENVIRONMENTAL responsabity

 

 

De : users <[hidden email]> De la part de Samuel Gougeon
Envoyé : mercredi 20 mai 2020 16:50
À : [hidden email]
Objet : Re: [Scilab-users] Scilab 6.1 too slow to list large vectors

 

Le 30/03/2020 à 11:56, Federico Miyara a écrit :


Dear All,

I have observed that Scilab 6.1 seems to have a regression respect to 6.0.2. Sometimes one forgets to put semicolon after the coputation of a vector with tens of thousands components. Scilab 6.0.2 listed all the components very fast. That was nice because one hadn't to cancel the computation, it took about 1 s. With 6.1 it takes much longer. For instance

Fs = 44100
T = 2.5
t = [0:T*Fs]/Fs;
ximp = exp(-t/0.3).*rand(t,"normal") + 0.004*rand(t,"normal");
 
tic
ximp = ximp(:)
toc
 

This takes 1.36 s in 6.0.2

The same code in 6.1 takes 182 s

Any idea why?

I know I can cancel at any moment the script execution, but if there were a process that took a lot of time one wouldn't be willing to stop it...

 

Apparently, the maximum number N of lines of the console scroll buffer set in the user preferences (by default to 3000) is not taken into account to abstract the display in this kind of situation. Is it?

Yet, if there is no opened diary, displaying 100000 "primary" rows looks 97% useless if the scroll buffer is 3000-row tall: 97000 rows will anyway become unreachable an lost, after the full display.

So, even without anticipating wrapping of long primary rows, that still multiplies the number of actual rows to display, wouldn't it be wise to limit the display to N primary lines, either the N last ones, or the N/2 first ones + "..." + the N/2 last ones ?

Even in the case of having so tall full diaries is required (that is a very specific and exceptional case), it is always possible to increase N through the preferences.

My two cents...

Samuel

 

 


_______________________________________________
users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.scilab.org/mailman/listinfo/users