Re: [Gems-users] Simics 2.2 vs Simics 3.0 statistics difference

["Berkin Ozisikyilmaz" <boz283@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi,

I haven't tried running with different RANDOM_SEED values.
I would stick with simics 2.2 but my problem arises from the fact that my
license is about to expire in a week, and I have more than a weeks
simulations left, and Simics is no longer issuing Simics2 licenses.
Switching to version 3 means in this case that I would have to rerun a
couple of months worth of simulations. I have contacted them, and they
pointed me to GEMS forum to see if anybody had similar observations. It
seems that I would need to contact them.

Berkin

-----Original Message-----
From: gems-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:gems-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Dan Gibson
Sent: 2009-03-10 00:00
To: Gems Users
Subject: Re: [Gems-users] Simics 2.2 vs Simics 3.0 statistics difference

On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 9:40 PM, Berkin Ozisikyilmaz
<boz283@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> ... since the combination of input parameters
> that I feed the applications change and hence for each of those I would
need
> to create a checkpoint and it wouldn't be a feasible way to do.
>

... or you can pick a Simics version and stick to it. It is well known
that small variations in initial conditions can have huge impacts on
parallel workloads. If your workload sees a lot of variance (aside:
how much does does performance vary run to run with a different
RANDOM_SEED and with the same Simics version?), you will have to run
additional data points to reach an acceptable confidence margin.

Regards,
Dan

-- 
http://www.cs.wisc.edu/~gibson [esc]:wq!
_______________________________________________
Gems-users mailing list
Gems-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.cs.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/gems-users
Use Google to search the GEMS Users mailing list by adding
"site:https://lists.cs.wisc.edu/archive/gems-users/"; to your search.