Skip to content
Snippets Groups Projects
Commit 61402ef0 authored by Pierre Augier's avatar Pierre Augier
Browse files

Finalize

parent 8a67cdec
No related branches found
No related tags found
1 merge request!5First modifications to take care of the editor remarks
......@@ -137,7 +137,7 @@
implementations using Pythran+OpenMP and Julia executed using 6 and 12 CPU
cores. We consider in Fig. \ref{fig1} the energy consumption of the cores used
(6 or 12 for these runs and 1 for the sequential jobs), which make sense on
shared cluster nodes wherein only requested cores are reserved. We see that
shared clusters wherein one can reserve only the needed cores. We see that
parallelism with threads has only a moderate impact on energy consumption since
the increase in power consumption partly counterbalances the decrease of
elapsed time. For example, the 12-threaded Pythran version is 10 times faster
......@@ -149,12 +149,12 @@
Python can actually be good solutions to easily obtain good performance while
retaining simplicity and readability. We think that minimizing the ecological
impact of scientific computing is mainly limited by human factors: time, work,
knowledge and skills. For example, scientists have to be able to run heavy
computations on clusters with workload managers optimized in terms of energy
consumption. They should know how to profile their code to discover which parts
can potentially be optimized. Therefore, time and money should be invested in
education and tooling to minimize the overall ecological impact of computing,
irrespective of the underlying language.
knowledge and skills. For example, scientists have to be able to use job
schedulers and shared clusters optimized in terms of energy consumption. They
should know how to profile their code to discover which parts can potentially
be optimized. Therefore, time and money should be invested in education and
tooling to minimize the overall ecological impact of computing, irrespective of
the underlying language.
\subsection*{Acknowledgements}
......
# What do we reply
Thank you for reading our draft and for your suggestions.
Thank you for reading our draft and for your suggestions. The pdf of a new
version is attached.
We agree with your suggestion to focus more on the commonalities between our
position and that of Zwart. We tried to be simple and short but we left the
......@@ -12,8 +13,8 @@
language on the ecology" and in the conclusions. We rewrote the first paragraph
which is now:
"We read with attention the comment by Zwart on **The ecological impact of
high-performance computing in astrophysics** \cite{Zwart2020}. We fully agree
"We read with attention the comment by Zwart on The ecological impact of
high-performance computing in astrophysics \cite{Zwart2020}. We fully agree
with its take-home message: scientists should be mindful of their carbon
footprint. One of the proposed solutions is to avoid the Python programming
language. We advocate that this would be counterproductive and that scientific
......@@ -39,7 +40,7 @@
code is to interpret it with the reference implementation called CPython. Due
to the lack of a built-in JIT compiler, CPython is relatively slow."
In total, with the slightly longer opening paragraph and no footnotes, the full
text is approximately 140 words shorter. We also took into account your other
pieces of advice. We hope that this manuscript can be suitable for publication
in this state.
In total, with the slightly longer opening paragraph and no footnotes, the text
is approximately 140 words shorter. We also took into account your other pieces
of advice. We hope that this manuscript can be suitable for publication in this
state.
0% Loading or .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Please register or to comment