Performance and --data-freq-chunk + --g-freq-int #475
Unanswered
AKHughes1994
asked this question in
Q&A
Replies: 1 comment 4 replies
-
The example is correct i.e. you should get identical gain solutions in both cases. Each interval is solved entirely independently of its neighbours. As a random aside, are you aware of QuartiCal? It has substantially better memory behaviour than CubiCal so it may be more appropriate for large problems (assuming it has the required functionality). |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
4 replies
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
-
Hello,
I know that the "chunks" determine the amount of data loaded into memory at a time, and the "ints" determine calibration solution intervals, but I'm wondering if there is any improvement in the quality of calibration solutions when
--data-freq-chunk
>--g-freq-int
or--data-time-chunk
>--g-time-int
.As an example if I set:
--data-time-chunk = 30
--g-time-int = 30
Would this give the exact same calibration solutions as:
--data-time-chunk = 60
--g-time-int = 30
Given that the solution intervals are the same. If I'm interpreting the parameter correctly, the major difference is that the latter scenario is faster because it loads more data at once. The motivation behind this question is I'm trying to calibrate a very large ms file so I am looking for ways to minimize the memory footprint without sacrificing too much calibration fidelity.
Cheers,
Andrew
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions