POOMA vs PETSc on Beowulf Clusters
Many of your questions may have already been answered in earlier discussions or in the FAQ. The search results page will indicate current discussions as well as past list serves, articles, and papers.
kaustuv kaustuv at stanford.eduFri Feb 14 09:48:29 PST 2003
- Previous message: Creating user accounts....
- Next message: getting data to nodes....
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Hi,
I am looking for a nice matrix library for parallel applications (mostly
solution of Partial Differential Equations on structured Grids over
cluster of linux boxes), and after a lot of web-searching I stumbled upon
these two...PETSc and POOMA. Having gone through the manuals of the two I
had following comparision chart:
PETSc:
-----
PROS:
+ Easy development of parallel applications & is in public domain.
+ Lot of Numerical libraries supported (Basic Backend is LAPACK)
+ Writen in C, so should give highly optimized code even with average
compilers.
CONS:
- You cannot extract an single indivisual element of array directly.
- No Stencils (like ones available in BLITZ++/POOMA) to make life easy.
- Not suited for Matrix Free methods for it assumes you finally have a
matrix (which might be costly to create even in compressed format)
POOMA:
------
PROS:
+ Easy development of parallel applications & is in public Domain.
+ Stencils via expression templates. So coding is a simplified.
CONS:
- Makes heavy use C++ expression templates which I believe mihgt hinder
compiler level optimization. In any case they lead to code bloat
- No support for numeric linear libraries (cf. PETSc)
Can some one please share theri experiences of their use with the two
libraies (advantages - disadvatages - suggestions - scalability)?
Regards
Kaustuv
- Previous message: Creating user accounts....
- Next message: getting data to nodes....
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
