architecture | ||
benchmark_low_level | ||
benchmark_python | ||
numpy | ||
puzzle.ipynb | ||
README.md |
What every scientist should know about computer architecture
Important: these are instructor notes, remove this file before showing the materials to the students. The notes can be added after the lecture, of course.
Introduction
- Puzzle (how swapping two nested for-loops makes out for a >27× slowdown
- Let students play around with the notebook and try to find the "bug"
- A more thorough benchmark using the same code is here
A digression in CPU architecture and the memory hierarchy
-
The need for a hierarchical access to data for the CPU should be clear now ➔ the "starving" CPU problem
-
Have a look at the historical evolution of speeds of different components in a computer:
- the CPU clock rate
- the memory (RAM) bandwidth, latency clock rate
- the storage media access rates
-
Measure size and timings for the memory hierarchy on my machine with a low level C benchmark
Back to the Python benchmark (second try)
- can we explain what is happening?
- it must have to do with the good (or bad) use of cache properties
- but how are numpy arrays laid out in memory?
Anatomy of a numpy array
Back to the Python benchmark (third try)
- can we explain what is happening now? Yes, more or less ;-)
- quick fix for the puzzle: try and add
order='F'
in the "bad" snippet and see that is "fixes" the bug ➔ why?
Notes on the Python benchmark:
- while running it attached to the P-core (
cpu0
), the P-core was running under a constant load of 100% (almost completely user-time) and at a fixed frequency of 3.8 GHz, where the theoretical max would be 5.2 GHz - while running it attached to the E-core (
cpu10
), the E-core was running under a constant load of 100% (almost completely user-time) and at a fixed requency of 2.5 GHz, where the theoretical max would be 3.9 GHz - ... ➔ the CPU does not "starve" because it scales its speed down to match the memory throughput? Or I am misinterpreting this? This problem which at first sight should be perfectly memory-bound, becomes CPU-bound, or actually, exactly balanced? ;-)
Excerpts of parallel Python
- The dangers and joys of automatic parallelization (like in numpy linear algebra routines) and the use of clusters/schedulers (but also on your laptop)
Concluding remarks
- how is all of this relevant for the users of a computing cluster?