Skip to content

Conversation

@jprotze
Copy link
Contributor

@jprotze jprotze commented Feb 28, 2024

No description provided.

@jprotze jprotze force-pushed the fixPerThreadBoolIndicator branch from 65cecb0 to 0090140 Compare February 28, 2024 14:27
@heplesser heplesser added T: Bug Wrong statements in the code or documentation S: High Should be handled next I: No breaking change Previously written code will work as before, no one should note anything changing (aside the fix) labels Feb 28, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

@heplesser heplesser left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@jprotze Thank you for the PR. I just have a few suggestions mainly related to NEST coding conventions.

@heplesser
Copy link
Contributor

@ackurth Could you benchmark this branch on a single node with microcircuit, up to 128 threads? Just to check that the change does not introduce a performance regression.

@ackurth
Copy link
Contributor

ackurth commented Mar 1, 2024

@ackurth Could you benchmark this branch on a single node with microcircuit, up to 128 threads? Just to check that the change does not introduce a performance regression.

Will do.

@terhorstd terhorstd added this to the NEST 3.7 milestone Mar 4, 2024
@terhorstd terhorstd mentioned this pull request Mar 4, 2024
jprotze and others added 2 commits March 6, 2024 10:45
Co-authored-by: Hans Ekkehard Plesser <hans.ekkehard.plesser@nmbu.no>
Copy link
Contributor

@heplesser heplesser left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@jprotze This looks good to me now. I still wait for results from systematic benchmarks on larger models (first checks look good) and will wait for final approval until then.

@ackurth
Copy link
Contributor

ackurth commented Mar 8, 2024

@ackurth Could you benchmark this branch on a single node with microcircuit, up to 128 threads? Just to check that the change does not introduce a performance regression.

I compared the suggested changes to the current NEST Master, there is no performance regression in our usual benchmarks of the microcircuit model.

@heplesser
Copy link
Contributor

@ackurth Could you benchmark this branch on a single node with microcircuit, up to 128 threads? Just to check that the change does not introduce a performance regression.

I compared the suggested changes to the current NEST Master, there is no performance regression in our usual benchmarks of the microcircuit model.

Excellent, then we can proceed. Thanks!

Copy link
Contributor

@heplesser heplesser left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

With positive benchmark results, I approve.

Copy link
Contributor

@suku248 suku248 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks @jprotze for this PR and @ackurth for benchmarking!

@suku248 suku248 merged commit 6ab67c5 into nest:master Mar 12, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

I: No breaking change Previously written code will work as before, no one should note anything changing (aside the fix) S: High Should be handled next T: Bug Wrong statements in the code or documentation

Projects

Status: Done

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants