# Test Data generator.

## Test Data generator.

Simple sample data generator.

22 posts / 0 nouveau(x)
Reportez-vous à notre Notice d'optimisation pour plus d'informations sur les choix et l'optimisation des performances dans les produits logiciels Intel.

I can't see code or attachment to your post,
but here is 2 files.

I think they are correct ... but check.

## Fichiers joints:

Fichier attachéTaille
901.61 Ko
2.42 Ko

Hi,

could you also paste proper answers for those test files?

I don't guarantee these results are correct but here's what our program outputs so far:
"3 4 17 14" for the second one and "156 134 424 290" for the first.
Is this what you also get?

I can confirm these outputs, I get them too.

Could you also post what you get doing the sum of this square (if you can get it easily) ?

Well I could... But you should do it. You just need to do two for loops and you can find out what the exact sum is.

No what I meant is I find 0 11 19 14 for a total of 252692. And I wondered if you could tell me what you find for your square, so I could compare to what my algorithm sums for it (which is 363). And eventually find out what is going on :P

Nevermind, little found it. Little mixup between declaring elements in int16_t and sums in int32_t. Anyway, thanks for making me notice :)

for others who may want these results, I have :

```example_input_500-300.txt
result : 156 134 424 290
maxSum : 10494167
```
```example_input_20-20.txt
result : 3 4 17 14
maxSum : 393579
```

Hi,

maybe you could post what processing time you had for the example data?

Thanks,

tank

Hi!

First post on the forum, here to share some results!

So here is what I get:

\$ time ./run 40 example_input_20-20.txt
3 4 17 14 = 393579
./run 40 example_input_20-20.txt 0.07s user 0.12s system 676% cpu 0.028 total

\$ time ./run 40 example_input_500-300.txt
156 134 424 290 = 10494167
./run 40 example_input_500-300.txt 0.66s user 0.17s system 1300% cpu 0.064 total

With a bigger input (generated):
\$ time ./run 40 example_input_5000-5000.txt
607 1376 4999 4939 = 117784684
./run 40 example_input_5000-5000.txt 404.06s user 8.40s system 5957% cpu 6.923 total

- Jeff

Just a question, were those numbers got on the MTL ? Anywho I got on my virtual machine (without parallelization, not done yet) : for the 20 by 20 0.036ms real 0.003 user 0.010 sys for the 500 by 300 0.401ms real 0.270 user 0.031 sys

I test only the second one : time ./run 1 example_input_500-300.txt
I got 63 63 421 236 Max value : 12028820
I have done some correction on our program.
D:max_value : 10494167
156 134 424 290

Fabien

0.401ms for 500x300? That's fast!

My results are for 20-20 example from (13,4) to (16,18) Is anyone have these results? Thanks in advance

@dina: if you ask about confirming if this is a correct result, scroll up and check a few post above. It is answered already

@buffer, I think you are misleading us, because the real time should always be larger than the user time (without parallelization). And is that 401 ms or 0.401 ms ?

The real time is larger than the user time in the results posted. 0.401>0.270 & 0.036>0.003. Anywho made others test with the same files :http://pix.toile-libre.org/upload/original/1320083187.png As you can see it's 0.401s or 401ms. Got even better :) PS: Those time were obtained on my virtual Fedora, on a Windows 7 Acer laptop.

Quoting Paul Guermonprez (Intel)

I can't see code or attachment to your post,
but here is 2 files.

I think they are correct ... but check.

Hello!

Can you provide us with some more details about test generation?

Are all tests cases random generated, or will there be manually generated test cases?

Also, some upper bound on matrix size would be quite nice to have to see how to handle memory constraints.

Tnx, Petar

Acer Aspire 7738G : Intel Core 2 Duo P8700 2.53GHz NVidia GeForce GT 130M 4Gb DDR3 I'll try to make some test on the MTL, but I currently don't have that kind of time ;)