[MINC-development] MINC 2.0.19/2.1 and HDF 1.6/1.8

[Andrew Janke]

On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 12:03, Andrew Janke <a.janke at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Wierd. I didn't notice this. Of course there is no way of telling if
>>> this is a HDF5 or MINC issue.
>>
>> The version for all other packages were the same. Only minc changed.
>
> eh? unpossible! :)
>
> MINC 2.0.18 == HDF5 1.6.x
>
> MINC 2.0.19 (current CVS HEAD == HDF5 1.8.x

Well this got me curious...  So I just ran my own test. (Core i7 950
3.07Ghz std "clock" speed, 12GB RAM, 30GB OCZ SSD HDD).

First std karmic build using packages.

$ mincmath -version
program: 2.0.18
libminc: 2.0.18
netcdf : "3.6.2" of Sep 24 2009 17:09:40 $
HDF5   : 1.6.6

$ minctracc -version
The program <minctracc> was built from:
Package mni_autoreg 0.99.6, compiled by @bertie
(x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) on Fri Oct  9 11:41:30 EST 2009

real	2m28.078s
user	2m27.880s
sys	0m0.180s

Now the new stuff
$ ./tree/bin/mincmath -version
program: 2.0.19
libminc: 2.0.19
netcdf : "3.6.2" of Sep 24 2009 17:09:40 $
HDF5   : 1.8.4

$ ./tree/bin/minctracc -version
The program <./tree/bin/minctracc> was built from:
Package mni_autoreg 0.99.6, compiled by @harold
(x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) on Fri Mar 19 12:23:26 EST 2010

real	2m33.449s
user	2m33.050s
sys	0m0.400s

---

I was also doing a bunch of things while this was happening so re-ran
the tests and got a 2m30 for the original and 2m31 for the new.  So
yes perhaps there is a minute slow down (1%) but from what I can see,
not anything to write home and tell mum about.

Interested to see Sylvains numbers.


--
Andrew Janke
(a.janke at gmail.com || http://a.janke.googlepages.com/)
Canberra->Australia    +61 (402) 700 883