Response #1: 2005-10-28
1. Is dense linear algebra a performance bottleneck in your applications?
2. How often do your applications use the arithmetic precisions listed below:
|a. Single precision: || Very Frequently|
|b. Double precision: || Frequently|
|c. More than double precision: || Rarely|
|d. Complex single precision: || Frequently|
|e. Complex double precision: || Frequently|
|f. Complex, more than double precision: || Never|
3. What dense matrix sizes are most important or time-consuming for your application?
10,000s X 10,000s
4. Does your application come close to, or run out of memory on important problems?
5. Number of processors used for your application:
|a. SMP: ||Less than 10|
|b. Distributed shared-memory: ||More than 10|
|c. Distributed memory: ||More than 10|
6. Which architectures do you use or intend to use in the next three years?
Multi-core-thread, Symmetric-multi-procs, Vector-computers, Distributed-memory, Widely-distributed
7. Do you use any other sequential or parallel dense linear algebra packages other than LAPACK or ScaLAPACK?
8. Please rank how the following features would be useful to your current or planned applications?
|a. User defined matrix types: ||Very useful|
|b. Using optional arguments in the language interface: ||Somewhat useful|
|c. Automatic memory allocation of the work space: ||Very useful|
|d. More complicated matrix data structures: ||Very useful|
9. Do your applications solve linear algebra problems of the type?
Linear positive definite systems, Banded linear systems, Symmetric eigenvalue, Least-square problems
1. Do you use LAPACK (or a vendor version of LAPACK )?
4. If you use LAPACK, do you use a vendors version or one obtained directly from Netlib?
5. If you have used both a vendors version of LAPACK and Netlibs, how do the two versions compare?
I use MKL provided by Intel. Level 2 BLAS routines from MKL are faster than
6. Do your applications make direct LAPACK calls?
7. Do your applications use libraries which depend on LAPACK?
8. Do your applications use a higher-level interface to LAPACK?
10. Is the LAPACK procedure interface a barrier to more extensive use?
11. From which languages do you call LAPACK routines?
Fortran 77, Fortran 90/95
12. Please describe any tools or helper functions that you frequently implement to assist your applications in using LAPACK?
I have not implemented such tools. I think that the use of lapack
routines is quite simple.
13. How could the LAPACK interface be improved to feel more natural to your application and implementation language?
I think it is not necessary to make such improvements.
14. If you have installed LAPACK yourself, how could the installation process be improved?
One could consider to provide makefiles for some popular platforms and compilers like Intel compilers.
15. How frequently do you refer to the LAPACK Users Guide?
1. Do you use ScaLAPACK (or a vendor version of ScaLAPACK )?
4. If you use ScaLAPACK, do you use a vendors version or one obtained directly from Netlib?
6. Do your applications make direct ScaLAPACK calls?
7. Do your applications use libraries which depend on ScaLAPACK?
8. Do your applications use a higher-level interface to ScaLAPACK?
10. Is the ScaLAPACK procedure interface a barrier to more extensive use?
11. From which languages do you call ScaLAPACK routines?
13. How could the ScaLAPACK interface be improved to feel more natural to your application and implementation language?
I think that the use of block cyclic distribution of dense matrices is
a little bit complicated. Thus it woluld be nice to find routines that assist do distribute matrics.
14. If you have installed ScaLAPACK yourself, how could the installation process be improved?
The collection of makefiles could be extended.
15. How frequently do you refer to the ScaLAPACK Users Guide?
Targeted Environment Specifics
1. Under which operating system environments do your applications run?
HP/UX, Linux, Unicos
2a. Please specify any particular libraries of frameworks used?
|5.Description of related activities|
|I use lapack routines to develop aplatations from hte area of signal processing. Esp. I'm interested in recursive filters.|
|1. I think that sca/lapack should offer a support for solving systems with Toeplitz matrices. Recently I have developed some algorithms for solving linear systems with banded triangular Toeplitz matrices (both versions using OpenMP, mpi and Level 2 & 3 BLAS routines). Please, let me know if you thinh that thet could be useful. Also see:
P. Stpiczynski: Numerical evaluation of linear recurrences on high performance computers and clusters of workstations, In: Proceedings of PARELEC 2004, IEEE Computer Society Press, 2004, 200-205P.
Stpiczynski: Solving linear recurrence systems using level 2 and 3 BLAS routines, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 3019 (2004) 1059-1066
2. Some support for vector processing counld be improved in case of multiple right hand side vectors (instead of repeating a simpler solver for one right hand side vector).
3. Recently I have developed a triangular matrix solver which use an alternative data distriburion (P. Stpiczynski: Parallel Cholesky factorization on orthogonal multiprocessors, Parallel Computing 18 (1992) 213-219). which is faster than the original scalapack routine. I believe that this idea can ba applied to produce faster Cholesky factorization. Currently I'm wonking on it. |
|7. Use DOE-lab resources||No|