Re^2: Parallelization of multiple nested loops

This contradicts this:

The problem is that with the forking inside the last loop it only starts max 6 processes

Which I did not notice at first but reading your post made me realize there might be something wrong here. Maybe the inner loop is so fast that the first child finishes before the seventh even starts? Which would make that loop a pretty bad candidate for parallelisation. Then again, this might be true with this test code, but not the actual program.

Comment on Re^2: Parallelization of multiple nested loops

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Parallelization of multiple nested loops by salva (Canon) on Feb 07, 2018 at 11:18 UTC
There may be at most 6 processes running in parallel. But my numbers refer to the total number of processes created and destroyed during the complete computation. My point is that starting and stopping processes have a non insignificant overhead. If you start too many the total cost of forking may be an important percentage of the total cost of the computation.	[reply]
Re^4: Parallelization of multiple nested loops by hippo (Archbishop) on Feb 07, 2018 at 11:26 UTC
Quite. If my reading of biosub's code (and my maths) is correct it forks 6^12 times (2,176,782,336 times). That's a tonne of overhead.	[reply]