Re: [Rd] compiling R | multi-Opteron | BLAS source

From: Evan Cooch <>
Date: Mon 24 Jul 2006 - 15:32:13 GMT

> I think the early version of ACML lagged behind others, but recent
> versions are competitive. I've run into precision problem (failing
> make check all) with some Goto BLAS before. Also, Goto BLAS has
> switched to a more restrictive license (probably not a problem for
> you though).

No, probably not a problem for us at this end, but good to know. I'm happy to give the latest version of ACML a try. In fact, it occurred to me that it would probably be worth comparing relative performance. I know that benchmarking is a technical issue, but I would be curious to see how some of our compute-intensive jobs perform.

>> 3) compilation of BLAS - I can compile for 32-bit, or 64-bit.
>> Presumably, given we've invested in 64-bit chips, and a
>> 64-bit OS, we'd like to consider a 64-bit compilation. Which,
>> also presumably, means we'd need 64-bit compilation for [R].
>> While I've read the short blurb on CRAN concerning 64-bi vs
>> 32-bit compilations (data size vs speed), I'd be happy to
>> have both on our machine. But, I'm not sure how one specifies
>> 64-bits in the [R] compilation - what flags to I need to set
>> during ./configure, or what config file do I need to edit?
> That's up to the compiler(s) you use (unstated). For GCC, I believe
> -m64/-m32 is the flag. For 64-bit GCC -m64 is the default.
> Andy

Thanks indeed. mailing list Received on Tue Jul 25 01:34:26 2006

Archive maintained by Robert King, hosted by the discipline of statistics at the University of Newcastle, Australia.
Archive generated by hypermail 2.1.8, at Mon 24 Jul 2006 - 18:32:18 GMT.

Mailing list information is available at Please read the posting guide before posting to the list.