-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 119
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
PyMAPDL performance decrease on MAPDL and on v222 onwards #3208
Comments
This issue might be worth looking into detail on the gRPC server summer sprint, starting in July. So I will start with the due diligence. @mikerife can you have a very quick look at the code (no need to run) and let me know if both codes are equivalent? I want to compare both approaches (run MAPDL commands and run PyMAPDL commands). It seems to me they are the same. @FredAns do you have any early feedback before we dig more into this? |
@pthieffry, FYI |
More feedback running v242I have used a remote server in Ansys VPN (in Lyon). Probably that is going to generate some overhead because of the long distance, but the lyon machine is way better than my laptop. Here the gRPC overhead is shown clearly. Huge difference. MAPDL based approach
PyMAPDL based approach
NotesI had to add: mapdl.clear()
mapdl.filname("dummy_solve", 1) |
Description
For some reason, the performance of MAPDL server got decreased quite a lot from v212, to v222 (and kept in this way unless until 2023R1).
There is also the issue about the degraded performance of the MAPDL based approach with respect to the PYMAPDL based against discussions on #757.
Context
This issue was found while working with @ayush-kumar-423 while doing a comparison between full MAPDL code and PyMAPDL code to modify element and nodal data.
Therefore, there are 2 files to consider.
Metrics
Some metrics to study this issue:
MAPDL v212
PyMAPDL
MAPDL based
MAPDL v231
PyMAPDL based code
MAPDL based code
Summary
Files
PyMAPDL based code
PyMAPDL based code
MAPDL based code
MAPDL based code
EDITED: I realised the file wasn't totally close at each loop in the PYMAPDL approach. I have fixed and change everything accordingly.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: