[Numpy-discussion] Changing the distributed binary for numpy 1.0.4 for windows ?
David M. Cooke
cookedm@physics.mcmaster...
Mon Dec 10 15:50:10 CST 2007
On Dec 10, 2007, at 10:30 , Matthieu Brucher wrote:
> 2007/12/10, Alexander Michael <lxander.m@gmail.com>: On Dec 10, 2007
> 6:48 AM, David Cournapeau <david@ar.media.kyoto-u.ac.jp> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Several people reported problems with numpy 1.0.4 (See #627 and
> > #628, but also other problems mentionned on the ML, which I cannot
> > find). They were all solved, as far as I know, by a binary I
> produced
> > (simply using mingw + netlib BLAS/LAPACK, no ATLAS). Maybe it
> would be
> > good to use those instead ? (I can recompile them if there is a
> special
> > thing to do to build them)
>
> Do I understand correctly that you are suggesting removing ATLAS from
> the Windows distribution? Wouldn't this make numpy very slow? I know
> on RHEL5 I see a very large improvement between the basic BLAS/LAPACK
> and ATLAS. Perhaps we should make an alternative Windows binary
> available without ATLAS just for those having problems with ATLAS?
> That's why David proposed the netlib version of BLAS/LAPACK and not
> the default implementation in numpy.
>
> I would agree with David ;)
Our versions of BLAS/LAPACK are f2c'd versions of the netlib 3.0 BLAS/
LAPACK (actually, of Debian's version of these -- they include several
fixes that weren't upstream).
So netlib's versions aren't going to be any faster, really. And
netlib's BLAS is slow. Now, if there is a BLAS that's easier to
compile than ATLAS on windows, that'd be improvement.
--
|>|\/|<
/------------------------------------------------------------------\
|David M. Cooke http://arbutus.physics.mcmaster.ca/dmc/
|cookedm@physics.mcmaster.ca
More information about the Numpy-discussion
mailing list