-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1
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
Reproducing paper benchmarks #14
Comments
Hey, we offer two kinds of pairing groups, (1) a built-in (pretty inefficient) Java pairing group, and (2) a wrapper for the much faster mcl. Now unfortuntely (at least for this request), we have reworked all of our library and completely broke the API that Clarc depended on. The same is true for our wrapper We can probably find the appropriate old versions so that the benchmarks can be reproduced. Maybe give us a week for that, you've caught us at a busy time 🙈. Sorry for the inconvenience. |
Ah I see, makes sense. I had a hunch it wasn't using mcl but given the readme didn't have any information on this I was hoping it was something dumb on my end. |
Hi, with the new commit you should now be able to just run the I've also pushed a Dockerfile to make this more easily reproducible. |
Thanks a lot for the speedy response and fix. It's working now! If anyone else is running this on MacOS, you need to move the Otherwise |
Hi, I'm trying to run the CLARC benchmarks but it seems to be slower than expected given Table 3 in the paper..
For example, I'm getting that it took ~18s, 763ms to verify (5 in Table 3) when it should be taking ~0s, 170 ms.
For context, I'm running on a 2019 MacBook pro:
./gradlew test --tests de.upb.crypto.clarc.acs.PerformanceTest
Any ideas for what could be going wrong here?
Thanks!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: