Hello,
2013/2/6 Konstantin Berlin <kber...@gmail.com> > > > > As for efficiency (or faster execution, if you want), I don't see the > > point in doubting that tasks like global search (e.g. in a genetic > > algorithm) will complete in less time when run in parallel... > > > Just a quick note. This statement is incorrect. Parallelization should be > done at the coarsest level. So if the program is already parallel, and each > thread is executing your parallel math function, it could indeed be worse. > I think *this* statement is incorrect. Whether or not you need parallelization is pretty much dependent on the application. For example, if I'm dealing with a stack of 2D images, having a single thread implementation is probably best. That way, I can decide to treat different images in different threads (parallelization would then occur at the coarsest level). On the other hand, if I'm dealing with a 3D image, maybe I would appreciate that each operation is parallelized. If that's not done at the finest level, then the user is stuck with a computation which takes for ever. S
