
From:  Jason Martin 
Subject:  Divergence from Solving functional nonlinear equation 
Date:  Mon, 28 Dec 2009 18:42:55 0500 
Useragent:  Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; enUS; rv:1.9.1.5) Gecko/20091204 Thunderbird/3.0 
Thomas, I don't have a slow system, and I don't fully understand Octave yet so please bear with me as I go through this. I am running on windows 7 professional x64 with 4 Gbs RAM and an AMD Turon II CPU. If I were to following this post, http://wwwold.cae.wisc.edu/pipermail/octavemaintainers/2009September/013441.html, and self compile Octave I am suspecting that my delay issues will be taken care of. Please correct me if I am wrong. Using your mfile and octave 3.2.3gnuplot 4.2 I get: > spdtst Elapsed time is 7.92482 seconds. octave3.2.3.exe:15:C:\octave\3.2.3_gcc4.4.0\matlab > Whereas if I use backend("fltk") instead of gnuplot I get: > spdtst Elapsed time is 1.3416 seconds. octave3.2.3.exe:5:C:\Octave\3.2.3_gcc4.4.0\matlab > Now, I know that I can get better performance by making Octave on my system, I haven't had time for it. Also, the complaint was that using a matrix of size 100 generated a long wait time. I modified the mfile to: function vout = spdtst(valmat) tic; x=linspace(.1,1,160); y=x; [xx,yy]=meshgrid(x,y); for a = rand(1,valmat)*2 b=1/a;zz=b*(xx.*yy).^(b1)+xx.^(b1)+yy.^(b1); figure; surf(xx,yy,zz);shading interp;fflush(1); end toc; and called it by spdtst(5). This resulted in the following times: gnuplot: octave3.2.3.exe:9:C:\Octave\3.2.3_gcc4.4.0\matlab > spdtst(5) Elapsed time is 12.4465 seconds. octave3.2.3.exe:10:C:\Octave\3.2.3_gcc4.4.0\matlab > fltk: octave3.2.3.exe:13:C:\Octave\3.2.3_gcc4.4.0\matlab > spdtst(5) Elapsed time is 1.44106 seconds. octave3.2.3.exe:14:C:\Octave\3.2.3_gcc4.4.0\matlab > *note that the gnuplot version takes almost twice as long as the hard coded version of the same mfile. for a 25 element matrix: > backend("fltk") octave3.2.3.exe:18:C:\Octave\3.2.3_gcc4.4.0\matlab > spdtst(25) Elapsed time is 6.64428 seconds. octave3.2.3.exe:19:C:\Octave\3.2.3_gcc4.4.0\matlab > backend("gnuplot") octave3.2.3.exe:20:C:\Octave\3.2.3_gcc4.4.0\matlab > spdtst(25) Elapsed time is 79.4634 seconds. octave3.2.3.exe:21:C:\Octave\3.2.3_gcc4.4.0\matlab > For a small number of points, I don't think that it matters which version you use. For a large number of values however, it looks like fltk is faster, at least on my system. I also didn't add in the time it took to actually draw each graph using the different backends. FLTK was almost instantaneous, whild GNUPLOT was slow going. It might be due to my graphics card, I am not sure. Jason On 12/28/2009 5:50 PM, Thomas Shores wrote: Disregard my last post. I misread the problem. However, I'm a bit puzzled by the delay. This file, test.m 
[Prev in Thread]  Current Thread  [Next in Thread] 