You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I noticed that using the wrf.omp_set_num_threadsfunction with cache could speed up the process of getvar from this page. However, in my case, wrf.omp_get_num_procs()=128 ,(64 CPU cores (128 total threads)), I found that setting wrf.omp_set_num_threads(48) is better than wrf.omp_set_num_threads(wrf.omp_get_num_procs()) or wrf.omp_get_num_procs(64), which means that the former case spend less time. Are there some rules to set the threads number to be used?
My wrfout files contain a series of variables whose shape is (time,level,lat,lon) = (4,53,312,321)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
ZhangAllen98
changed the title
How to
How to determine the suitable number of threads for omp_set_num_threads
Feb 2, 2023
I noticed that using the
wrf.omp_set_num_threads
function withcache
could speed up the process ofgetvar
from this page. However, in my case,wrf.omp_get_num_procs()=128
,(64 CPU cores (128 total threads)), I found that settingwrf.omp_set_num_threads(48)
is better thanwrf.omp_set_num_threads(wrf.omp_get_num_procs())
orwrf.omp_get_num_procs(64)
, which means that the former case spend less time. Are there some rules to set the threads number to be used?My wrfout files contain a series of variables whose shape is
(time,level,lat,lon) = (4,53,312,321)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: