Is it technically possible to re-write E+ that would enable it
to do multi-threading, so we can use the extra computing of multi-processors or
multi-cores? Perhaps given the funding? Or the equations and energy
balances behind E+ would not allow such multi-threading?
From:
EnergyPlus_Support@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:EnergyPlus_Support@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Edward G. Lyon
Sent: Friday, August 22, 2008 6:46 AM
To: EnergyPlus_Support@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [EnergyPlus_Support] Re: E+ runtime speed
If you are going to do a complex
building, expect to wait for answers. And completely forget about other
interesting software like CFD. My last E+ project with 28 zones took a
couple of hours to run. I’m using purchased air and not a full HVAC
system, but I have a lot surfaces and non-rectangular spaces. I routinely
run a few days simulation time to check for errors and then batch several full
runs to work over night…while I sleep…(3 year old 3.4 gig p4, 3 gig
800 meghz memory, raid 0 disk array)…I like sleeping so much I wrote some
utilities to parse and graph my result files automatically after the E+
runs. Nothing like fresh coffee and comparison graphs with
breakfast.
Faster processor good – new
machines are not pushing the processor speed in favor of overall operational
system performance. Now a clean machine with minimal overhead extras will
be faster. Vista may have more bloat than XP, but I haven’t tested
that. I will tell you that I have some older notebooks dedicated to data
logging tasks and they are very responsive after a complete XP reload and no
virus protection software running (they are not on line).
Core Duo or Core Quad – E+ does
not directly use multiple processors. However, these processors often
have larger internal memory caches, so performance is improved when only one
processor works with the whole cache. Multiple processors should help if
you run something else like a word processor or Excel while you are waiting,
which leads to don’t run a bunch of stuff in the background while you are
calculating.
Big, on chip internal memory cache very
good, less time spent waiting for slower external memory. When I built my
computer, I had to trade away the cost of large internal cache.
More memory good to a point, you only
need enough memory to hold the entire program without using disk access virtual
memory. Fastest front side memory bus with matched memory is good.
E+ does spend a lot of time writing
files so fast drives, perhaps striped, and large drive buffers probably helps a
bit. Now if you are tapping virtual memory at all for some reason, run
virtual memory on a different fast disk drive dedicated to only virtual
memory. A different volume on the same hard drive doesn’t do the
trick.
Time is money, work smarter, it often
beats faster, more expensive mistakes…
Ned Lyon, P.E. (MA)
Staff Consultant
SIMPSON GUMPERTZ & HEGER
781.907.9000 main
781.907.9350 direct
781.907.9009 fax
www.sgh.com
From:
EnergyPlus_Support@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:EnergyPlus_Support@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of JV Dirkes II
Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2008 4:58 PM
To: EnergyPlus_Support@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [EnergyPlus_Support] Re: E+ runtime speed
Dear E+ Support,
May I have an update on this post?
In summary, this old post says that:
- Higher processor speed is good
- More memory helps
- Multiple processors do not help (e.g., "Core
Duo" or Core Quad")
- Does more cache memory help?
- Does the operating system (especially Windows XP
vs. Vista) make a difference?
- If 2GB memory is good, is 4GB twice as good?
- Same question for processor speed.
I
am now using a 1.7GHz Core Duo PC with 2GB of RAM. Time is money, and
8-10 minutes seems too long to wait for 20 zones and a full weather year, so
I'm evaluating options.
Thanks in advance!
p.s., The advantage of being impatient is that I've learned numerous ways to
speed things up on my "too slow" PC from this forum that I would
otherwise not know about.
--- In EnergyPlus_Support@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Linda Lawrie <linda@...>
wrote:
>
> For simple buildings, EnergyPlus can be quite fast. However, there
> are a few hints to help the runtimes.
>
> 1. Plain and simple, get the most memory into your computer that you
> can. We have one file that is a 4 zone building and reports many
> variables. On a 1.8GHZ computer with 768MB memory, it was running
> about 8 minutes for a full annual run. On my newer 2.1 GHZ computer
> with 2G of memory it is about 2 minutes.
>
> 2. We continually try to hack away at the run times. Some
> developers are more atuned to reducing runtimes than others.
>
> 3. There are some other hints to try to use: Report on only the
> variables you need and report on them at hourly or less
> resolution. Use a lower time step frequency (i.e. 4 rather than 6
> times per hour).
>
> 4. "Does E+ have a "shoebox mode" where is lumps every
thing into a
> simplified building? I know it has an option to lump windows, but from
what
> I've seen this is not enough." Not really -- however, if shadowing
> is not that important, you can use the "minimal shadowing"
option on
> the BUILDING object. I am not sure how much that helps.
>
> Manually, you can lump like orientation and construction walls into
> one giant wall -- but this takes considerable work. As you noted you
> can put multipliers on windows (and in V1.4 doors).
>
> 5. "I noticed that Running without HVAC was MUCH faster. What are
best
> settings to speed up the HVAC code?" Also, you could try the
> purchased air solution for HVAC -- that should be much faster than
> other HVAC modes. If you are comparing multiple buildings, the
> decrease in accuracy of the results may not be as important as
> getting them running quickly. We also have the System Convergence
> Limits object -- that can be used to try to fine tune the HVAC results.
>
> 6. "If I get a new 4 processor computer, is E+ written to efficiency
> take advantage of multiple processors? Are there any benchmarks?"
>
> We do not use options in the complier to try to make use of multiple
> processors, as many people will not have that kind of
> architecture. Getting the most memory you can on the computer does
> seem to help, as noted above.
>
> 7. For a simple building, 50 minutes sounds way too long -- unless
> your computer is fairly old. How many zones is it? If you would
> like us to look at it, please upload or send directly.
>
>
> Linda
>
> EnergyPlus WebSite: http://www.energyplus.gov
> Owner: EnergyPlus_Support list
> Member: EnergyPlus Development Team
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
The primary EnergyPlus web site is found at:
http://www.energyplus.gov
The group web site is:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EnergyPlus_Support/
Attachments are not allowed -- please post any files to the appropriate folder in the Files area of the Support Web Site.
EnergyPlus Documentation is searchable. Open EPlusMainMenu.pdf under the Documentation link and press the "search" button.
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
__,_._,___