Alexei<div><br></div><div>thanks for helping, </div><div><br></div><div>i am going to do something equivalent to what you suggested, i will fill all expresions of the mapMatrix with zeros, and see how much RAM i consume because of the strings.</div>
<div>ill post my results in a moment.</div><div>best regards</div><div>Cristobal<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 9:53 AM, Alexei Sheplyakov <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:alexei.sheplyakov@gmail.com">alexei.sheplyakov@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">Hi again,<br>
<div class="im"><br>
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 12:22 AM, Cristobal Navarro <<a href="mailto:axischire@gmail.com">axischire@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
> i kept investigating,<br>
> based on the test i've made, im almost sure, 99%, that the increase in<br>
> memory usage is due to the segmentation of the expressions.<br>
<br>
</div>I don't think the problem has anything to do with GiNaC. Hint: try sticking<br>
ints (instead of ex*) into that map. Check the memory usage, and compare<br>
it with your calculations.<br>
<br>
Use a different data structure (perhaps hash map or a sorted array), and<br>
store ex instead of pointers.<br>
<br>
Best regards,<br>
<font color="#888888"> Alexei<br>
</font><div><div></div><div class="h5">_______________________________________________<br>
GiNaC-list mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:GiNaC-list@ginac.de">GiNaC-list@ginac.de</a><br>
<a href="https://www.cebix.net/mailman/listinfo/ginac-list" target="_blank">https://www.cebix.net/mailman/listinfo/ginac-list</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>