leonarski_fandClaude Opus 5.5
80f634b641
Build Packages / Create release (push) Successful in 8s
Build Packages / build:portable:macos-arm64:nocuda (push) Successful in 5m31s
Build Packages / build:portable:windows-x86_64:nocuda (push) Successful in 12m45s
Build Packages / HDF5 consumer tests (DIALS, XDS) (push) Successful in 37m25s
Build Packages / build:portable:linux-x86_64:cuda (push) Canceled after 0s
Build Packages / build:portable:linux-x86_64:nocuda (push) Canceled after 0s
Build Packages / build:rugnux:linux-aarch64:cuda (push) Canceled after 0s
Build Packages / Validation Battery (push) Canceled after 0s
Build Packages / Unit tests (push) Canceled after 48m13s
Build Packages / build:jfjoch:rocky8:cuda (push) Canceled after 0s
Build Packages / build:jfjoch:rocky8:cuda-sls9 (push) Canceled after 0s
Build Packages / build:jfjoch:rocky8:nocuda (push) Canceled after 0s
Build Packages / build:jfjoch:rocky9:cuda (push) Canceled after 0s
Build Packages / build:jfjoch:rocky9:cuda-sls9 (push) Canceled after 0s
Build Packages / build:jfjoch:rocky9:nocuda (push) Canceled after 0s
Build Packages / build:jfjoch:ubuntu2204:cuda (push) Canceled after 0s
Build Packages / build:jfjoch:ubuntu2204:nocuda (push) Canceled after 0s
Build Packages / build:jfjoch:ubuntu2404:cuda (push) Canceled after 0s
Build Packages / build:jfjoch:ubuntu2404:nocuda (push) Canceled after 0s
Build Packages / Generate python client (push) Canceled after 0s
Build Packages / Build documentation (push) Canceled after 0s
Build Packages / build:portable:windows-x86_64:cuda (push) Canceled after 21m47s
Engine placement: the rigid-body engines past this card's first go one card after the other in turn, from
the next card and this one last, each within half of its budget. A small cell on four cards (24 engines of
0.09 GB) had put all of them on this card, which has room for them, where rc176 spread them; now 6/6/6/6.
A large cell on four 15.6 GB cards keeps T+1/T+2/T+2/T+2.
Layout: packing was refused wherever it cost any card an engine, which kept 4nwv plain on four T4s although
the packed rotation function on ONE card (15.1 s) already beat plain over four (18.5 s). Now the two layouts'
plans are compared on a small cost model, decided once before the search from sizes and counts alone:
seconds = rotation interpolations (orientations x reflections x operators) x s/interpolation / cards with a copy
+ rigid-body fits at once x engine GB x s/(fit GB) / engines
Constants measured on 4nwv on Tesla T4 (17255 x 244183 x 4 interpolations): 75.8 s plain and 15.1 s packed on
one card; rescoring + null 28.5 s with one engine and 11.6 s with seven, 9 fits of 2.10 GB, so 19.7 s shared
among the engines. Packing must still keep the search, the scores and (where plain has it) the rigid body on
the GPU, and the budget must hold both grids while the packed one is made. Expected on four T4s: packed
T+1/T+1/T+1/T+1, 8.7 s against 21.8 s plain. One card is unchanged (the engines are the same either way, so
packed). The layout line now logs both expected times and the search's size.
Layout and engine count change where the work runs, never a number.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01PXc1zD1yxHqaR1DGdCTHL4