similar to: Debate: Shall some of Microsoft R Open Code be ported to mainstream R?

On 29 October 2017 at 22:01, Kenny Bell wrote: | User here: incorporating Intel's MKL, as MRO does, would be a very welcome | addition. | | I was an MRO user before and it improved my experience with medium data | immensely. | | They did, however, leave behind bugs here and there, especially related to | development with Rcpp, so I switched back to vanilla R. With all due respect: You may

Dear R Developers, First of all, I would like to thank you Jeroen Ooms for taking the binary Window Builds from Duncan. I firmly believe that the R Community will benefit a lot from his work. However, the debate I would like to open is about if some of Microsoft R Open Code shall be ported from R Open to Mainstream R. There are some beneficts in R Open such as multithreaded performance:

[Sent offlist accidentally] What concerns me first and foremost is that the licensure would have to be ironclad (including for commercial use like vanilla R now) as well as ensuring that R remains completely FLOSS. Anything ?added? to R has to be a no-strings-attached gift to R. Also, I would think that it would have to play nice with existing workflows (like OpenBLAS instead of MKL) unless

So as long as I can read, OpenBlas, for Windows, might be a worth considering option: http://www.openblas.net But Intel MKL also seems to be free*: https://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/free-mkl Thank you, Juan El 30/10/2017 6:45 p. m., "Avraham Adler" <avraham.adler at gmail.com> escribi?: > [Sent offlist accidentally] > > What concerns me first and foremost is

It seems like many of the multi-threaded BLASes have some sort of fundamental problem preventing use in the way Juan suggests: - Dirk's vignette states that ATLAS "fixes the number of cores used at compile-time and cannot vary this setting at run-time", so any user-friendly implementation for R would have to compile ATLAS for 1-16 threads to allow the user to switch at run-time.

Hi R-devel list, OpenBLAS is readily available for unix-likes: https://cloud.r-project.org/web/packages/gcbd/vignettes/gcbd.pdf However, my questions are: 1) Would R-devel consider using OpenBLAS for the main distribution of R for all platforms including Windows? 2) If so, would R-devel set the default multi-thread level to the number of (real) cores on a machine? My sense is there're a

User here: incorporating Intel's MKL, as MRO does, would be a very welcome addition. I was an MRO user before and it improved my experience with medium data immensely. They did, however, leave behind bugs here and there, especially related to development with Rcpp, so I switched back to vanilla R. On Mon, Oct 30, 2017, 9:42 AM Juan Telleria <jtelleriar at gmail.com> wrote: > Dear

On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 1:42 PM, Dirk Eddelbuettel <edd at debian.org> wrote: > > On 24 August 2015 at 11:43, arnaud gaboury wrote: > | On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 11:29 AM, Bj?rn-Helge Mevik > | <b.h.mevik at usit.uio.no> wrote: > | > arnaud gaboury <arnaud.gaboury at gmail.com> writes: > | > > | >> - Intel MKL: this is part of Intel Parallel Studio

On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 11:29 AM, Bj?rn-Helge Mevik <b.h.mevik at usit.uio.no> wrote: > arnaud gaboury <arnaud.gaboury at gmail.com> writes: > >> - Intel MKL: this is part of Intel Parallel Studio and is a paid >> software. Now, there is the MKL package distributed by >> Revolutionanalytics, but I am not certain how this can be distributed >> for free. Is

Hi I just read the thread on gotoBLAS, as well as the excellent vignette of gcbd. I still have some confusion and would like to ask very basic questions, hope I am not taking too much of your time. The point that retained my attention was the question of using implicit (multi-threaded blas) versus explicit (parallel code) optimisation. As I understood, the ideal would be to use a

> On 6 Feb 2019, at 10:58, Martin Maechler <maechler at stat.math.ethz.ch> wrote: > ..... > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > I summarize what has been reported till: > > Failure in these cases > ======== > 1. Kasper K ("Scientific Linux", self compiled R, using Intel's MKL > for BLAS/LAPACK)

> I would appreciate any insights over compiling R 3.4 with Intel MKL -- I have been successful until R 3.3.3 but now it stops complaining about pcre though it worked without Intel MKL as follows, I successfully built R-rc_2017-04-19_r72555.tar.gz with icc & MKL on centos 7 with this: # https://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/build-r-301-with-intel-c-compiler-and-intel-mkl-on-linux#

On point 1): The standard approach seems to favor the reference BLAS for reasons other than speed. For example, vecLib, Apple's multi-threaded BLAS library, is not the default choice for macOS binaries due to concerns about 'precision'. See: https://cloud.r-project.org/bin/macosx/RMacOSX-FAQ.html#Whic h-BLAS-is-used-and-how-can-it-be-changed_003f This doesn't appear to be Mac-

I get the failure message. To be specific: adcomp.git>R CMD BATCH --quiet test_nlminb.R adcomp.git>cat test_nlminb.Rout > f <- function(x) sum( log(diff(x)^2+.01) + (x[1]-1)^2 ) > opt <- nlminb(rep(0, 10), f, lower=-1, upper=3) > xhat <- rep(1, 10) > abs( opt$objective - f(xhat) ) < 1e-4? ## Must be TRUE [1] FALSE My system is described by: adcomp.git>uname

Please pardon my ignorance, but doesn't OpenBLAS still not always play nicely with multi-threaded OpenMP? (for example, don't race conditions sometimes crop up)? If so, it might be nice to have the ability to temporarily disable multi-threaded OpenMP (effectively: omp_set_num_threads(1)) for the duration of operations using OpenBLAS. Regards Ben > Julia using OpenBLAS is *very*

Julia Programming Language uses also OpenBlas, and it is actively maintained with bugs being fixed as I have checked it out: http://www.openblas.net/Changelog.txt So I still see it ok to be included as an options(...) feature (by default off, just for safety), over other Blas libraries. R could not use Intel MKL for legal reasons (I think), because as long that R ships with GPL libraries,

So I have two Dell power-edge machines running latest Ubuntu (13.04) with latest version of R (3.01). I installed revolution-mkl on one machine (T-410) and it works fine. On the second machine (T-620), it says the latest version of revolution-mkl is installed, but I'm getting no multi-processor functioning (R-benchmark-25.R) runs on a single processor and takes same amount of time

On 24 August 2015 at 11:43, arnaud gaboury wrote: | On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 11:29 AM, Bj?rn-Helge Mevik | <b.h.mevik at usit.uio.no> wrote: | > arnaud gaboury <arnaud.gaboury at gmail.com> writes: | > | >> - Intel MKL: this is part of Intel Parallel Studio and is a paid | >> software. Now, there is the MKL package distributed by | >> Revolutionanalytics, but I

I want to build R optimized, with either MKL, OpenBLAS or ATLAS. My OS: Fedora 22 Hardware: CPU op-mode(s): 32-bit, 64-bit Byte Order: Little Endian CPU(s): 8 Thread(s) per core: 2 Vendor ID: GenuineIntel Model name: Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-2600K CPU @ 3.40GHz I am a little confused when it comes to choose a method and would like to hear your experiences. If I am right, I have 3 possibilities: -

I didn't do the compile; is there a way to check whether that was used? If not, I'll inquire with our sysadmin and report back. In any case, my suggestion was motivated by the fact that some parts of R use OpenMP while others do not, in the hope that the former could have their OpenBLAS omelet without breaking the OpenMP eggs, so to speak. On 01/09/2018 06:41 PM, Keith O'Hara