Skip to content
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

Parallelize greedy algorithm #155

merged 31 commits into from Oct 5, 2015

Parallelize greedy algorithm #155

merged 31 commits into from Oct 5, 2015


Copy link

@sdrave sdrave commented Oct 1, 2015

This pull request contains the (updated) parallelized version of pymor.algorithms.greedy from the pymor-paper branch.

distribute -> push
distribute_array -> scatter_array
distribute_list -> scatter_list
and use DummyPool to have only on code path for both the
sequential and parallel case.
@sdrave sdrave added this to the 0.4 milestone Oct 1, 2015
else:'Using pool of {} workers for parallel greedy search'.format(len(pool)))

with RemoteObjectManager() as rom:
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

rom may be a misleading name in the context of model reduction (reduced order model), but it is probably unproblematic in this local context...

Copy link

Code Health
Repository health increased by 0.00% when pulling 5cc43a6 on parallel_greedy_merge into f7c29ce on master.

Copy link
Member Author

sdrave commented Oct 5, 2015

With #148 merged, I would propose to merge this one as well. I guess, the implementation could still use some testing, but it gets more testing if its in master and 0.4 is still some way ahead ...

Copy link

agreed, go ahead

sdrave added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 5, 2015
@sdrave sdrave merged commit ace8d74 into master Oct 5, 2015
@renefritze renefritze deleted the parallel_greedy_merge branch October 6, 2015 13:09
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
None yet
None yet

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants