[parsec-users] Freqmine Question Help
ybao at CS.Princeton.EDU
Wed Aug 8 15:19:10 EDT 2012
It looks sort of strange. Are you sure you have enabled OpenMP?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Raghav Mohan" <rmohan2 at wisc.edu>
To: parsec-users at lists.cs.princeton.edu
Sent: Wednesday, August 8, 2012 3:04:06 PM
Subject: [parsec-users] Freqmine Question Help
I am trying to parallelize the Freqmine(parsec v 2.1) benchmark with my own parallel library instead of Open MP. I ran the freqmine benchmark and compared the results from the sequential to open MP version. I would expect the Open MP time to be drastically less, however, it keeps increasing by the magnitude of threads. (Essentially reverse speedup). I am running freqmine on a Hyper threaded Intel Xeon E5620 CPU. This machine has 8 cores that are hyperthreaded, giving 16 threads. Here are the sample results:
./freqmine kosarak_250k.dat 220 out.txt
Sequential Version Result :
the data preparation cost 0.163102 seconds, the FPgrowth cost 2.720993 seconds
OMP Version Result (16 threads):
the data preparation cost 0.191582 seconds, the FPgrowth cost 9.168250 seconds
As one can see, the FPgrowth cost for the threaded is about 4 times more than the sequential. This is the behavior is replicated for all inputs.
I apologize if I am missing something or interpreting the results wrongly, and this is the expected behavior, however, I read the manual, and I could not find any information on this.
Any help provided is more than greatly appreciated.
parsec-users mailing list
parsec-users at lists.cs.princeton.edu
More information about the parsec-users