Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Users
  • Groups
  • Search
  • Get Qt Extensions
  • Unsolved
Collapse
Brand Logo
  1. Home
  2. Qt Development
  3. General and Desktop
  4. speed of different loop implementations

speed of different loop implementations

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Solved General and Desktop
11 Posts 5 Posters 3.1k Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • SGaistS Offline
    SGaistS Offline
    SGaist
    Lifetime Qt Champion
    wrote on last edited by
    #2

    Hi,

    You should rather use a QVector if you want to go the Qt way. It should perform better than QList.

    Interested in AI ? www.idiap.ch
    Please read the Qt Code of Conduct - https://forum.qt.io/topic/113070/qt-code-of-conduct

    1 Reply Last reply
    1
    • gde23G Offline
      gde23G Offline
      gde23
      wrote on last edited by
      #3

      @SGaist :Thanks for the quick answer.
      I tested QVector as well as std::vector for the container, and get more or less the same result as for the QList in all cases:
      QVector seems to be slightly faster however the difference is less than 1%

      Eigen3 4x1000__________ 61874 milliseconds
      Eigen2 4x1 QList_________49248 milliseconds
      RayClass QList__________49127 milliseconds
      RayClass QVector________49536 milliseconds
      RayClassMethode QList____ 47555 milliseconds
      RayClassMethode QVector__ 47347 milliseconds
      RayClassMethode std::vector_ 47126 milliseconds

      i think i will implemet the real algorithm and test it again with the different

      kshegunovK 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • gde23G gde23

        @SGaist :Thanks for the quick answer.
        I tested QVector as well as std::vector for the container, and get more or less the same result as for the QList in all cases:
        QVector seems to be slightly faster however the difference is less than 1%

        Eigen3 4x1000__________ 61874 milliseconds
        Eigen2 4x1 QList_________49248 milliseconds
        RayClass QList__________49127 milliseconds
        RayClass QVector________49536 milliseconds
        RayClassMethode QList____ 47555 milliseconds
        RayClassMethode QVector__ 47347 milliseconds
        RayClassMethode std::vector_ 47126 milliseconds

        i think i will implemet the real algorithm and test it again with the different

        kshegunovK Offline
        kshegunovK Offline
        kshegunov
        Moderators
        wrote on last edited by kshegunov
        #4

        Instead of doing matrix-vector multiplications in a loop do a single matrix-matrix multiplication and drop the OpenMP stuff. Eigen (if that's the library you're using) already features threading internally and makes use of the extensions your processor supports. Put your vectors as columns in a rectangular matrix (4x1000) and do the multiplication with the 4x4 matrix from the left. The resulting (multiplied) vectors will be the columns of the produced (4x1000) rectangular matrix. Basically:

        void calcMatrix(const Matrix<qreal, 4, 4> & M, Matrix<qreal, 4, 1000> & rays)
        {
            rays = M * rays;
        }
        

        Read and abide by the Qt Code of Conduct

        1 Reply Last reply
        4
        • gde23G Offline
          gde23G Offline
          gde23
          wrote on last edited by
          #5

          @kshegunov Thanks. That is really a lot faster.
          However i'm getting in trouble for large matrices (4x10000).

          I get following error:

          /usr/include/eigen3/Eigen/src/Core/DenseStorage.h:33: error: 'OBJECT_ALLOCATED_ON_STACK_IS_TOO_BIG' is not a member of 'Eigen::internal::static_assertion<false>' EIGEN_STATIC_ASSERT(Size * sizeof(T) <= EIGEN_STACK_ALLOCATION_LIMIT, OBJECT_ALLOCATED_ON_STACK_IS_TOO_BIG);

          The matrices i created should not be on the stack, so i think eigen allocates some memory on the stack internally? Can this be changes?

          mrjjM 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • gde23G gde23

            @kshegunov Thanks. That is really a lot faster.
            However i'm getting in trouble for large matrices (4x10000).

            I get following error:

            /usr/include/eigen3/Eigen/src/Core/DenseStorage.h:33: error: 'OBJECT_ALLOCATED_ON_STACK_IS_TOO_BIG' is not a member of 'Eigen::internal::static_assertion<false>' EIGEN_STATIC_ASSERT(Size * sizeof(T) <= EIGEN_STACK_ALLOCATION_LIMIT, OBJECT_ALLOCATED_ON_STACK_IS_TOO_BIG);

            The matrices i created should not be on the stack, so i think eigen allocates some memory on the stack internally? Can this be changes?

            mrjjM Offline
            mrjjM Offline
            mrjj
            Lifetime Qt Champion
            wrote on last edited by
            #6

            @gde23 said in speed of different loop implementations:

            OBJECT_ALLOCATED_ON_STACK_IS_TOO_BIG

            Google tells me you can do
            #define EIGEN_STACK_ALLOCATION_LIMIT 1000000
            before including Eigen/Core
            To alter the limit.
            If that is enough, I cant tell :)

            1 Reply Last reply
            2
            • VRoninV Offline
              VRoninV Offline
              VRonin
              wrote on last edited by
              #7

              #define EIGEN_STACK_ALLOCATION_LIMIT 0 removes the limit completely not sure it this will just cause stack-overflow anyway as that is a flag designed to check for this kind of problems at compile time instead of runtime

              "La mort n'est rien, mais vivre vaincu et sans gloire, c'est mourir tous les jours"
              ~Napoleon Bonaparte

              On a crusade to banish setIndexWidget() from the holy land of Qt

              1 Reply Last reply
              1
              • gde23G Offline
                gde23G Offline
                gde23
                wrote on last edited by
                #8

                @mrjj Thanks, that solved the problem

                kshegunovK 1 Reply Last reply
                1
                • gde23G gde23

                  @mrjj Thanks, that solved the problem

                  kshegunovK Offline
                  kshegunovK Offline
                  kshegunov
                  Moderators
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #9

                  Don't mess with the stack! Instead make your (big) matrix, the one holding the vectors, dynamically sized (i.e. allocated on the heap). Use:

                  Matrix<qreal, 4, Dynamic>
                  

                  instead of a fixed number for the columns number. And don't forget to initialize it before using. Follow the documentation for more details.

                  Kind regards.

                  Read and abide by the Qt Code of Conduct

                  VRoninV 1 Reply Last reply
                  6
                  • kshegunovK kshegunov

                    Don't mess with the stack! Instead make your (big) matrix, the one holding the vectors, dynamically sized (i.e. allocated on the heap). Use:

                    Matrix<qreal, 4, Dynamic>
                    

                    instead of a fixed number for the columns number. And don't forget to initialize it before using. Follow the documentation for more details.

                    Kind regards.

                    VRoninV Offline
                    VRoninV Offline
                    VRonin
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #10

                    @kshegunov Can I upvote you 10 times?

                    "La mort n'est rien, mais vivre vaincu et sans gloire, c'est mourir tous les jours"
                    ~Napoleon Bonaparte

                    On a crusade to banish setIndexWidget() from the holy land of Qt

                    kshegunovK 1 Reply Last reply
                    2
                    • VRoninV VRonin

                      @kshegunov Can I upvote you 10 times?

                      kshegunovK Offline
                      kshegunovK Offline
                      kshegunov
                      Moderators
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #11

                      Yes. I allow it. :]

                      Read and abide by the Qt Code of Conduct

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      2

                      • Login

                      • Login or register to search.
                      • First post
                        Last post
                      0
                      • Categories
                      • Recent
                      • Tags
                      • Popular
                      • Users
                      • Groups
                      • Search
                      • Get Qt Extensions
                      • Unsolved