commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Edward J. Yoon" <edwardy...@apache.org>
Subject Re: commons-math, matrix-toolkits-java and consolidation
Date Fri, 22 May 2009 02:14:32 GMT
That's really cool.

BTW, Can I ask about the plan of data distribution strategies of your
'distributed' package in the future? IMO, it seems, it doesn't sit
well with 'common-math' project.

If if there is a developer who wants to implement 'distributed', pls
let us know, too. I'm working for the Hama
(http://incubator.apache.org/hama) with ScaLAPACK members.

On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 7:18 PM, Sam Halliday <sam.halliday@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Dear all,
>
> I am a maintainer of the matrix-toolkits-java
>
>  http://code.google.com/p/matrix-toolkits-java/
>
> which is a comprehensive collection of matrix data structures, linear
> solvers, least squares methods, eigenvalue and singular value
> decompositions.
>
> This note is in regard to the commons-math library. It is clear that our
> projects dovetail, especially when I look at "linear" in version 2.0 of the
> API. It would be good if we could either complement or consolidate efforts,
> rather than reproduce.
>
> It would be excellent if all the functionality of matrix-toolkits-java were
> available as part of commons-math. There is already too much diversity and
> un-maintained maths code out there for Java!
>
> As a start, I'd like to discourage the use of a solid implementation for
> SparseReal{Vector, Matrix}... please prefer an interface approach, allowing
> implementations based on the Templates project:-
>
>  http://www.netlib.org/templates
>
> The reason is that the storage implementation should be related to the type
> of data being stored. For example, there are many well-known kinds of sparse
> matrix that are well suited to particular kinds of calculations... consider
> multiplying sparse matrices that you know to be diagonal!
>
> In general, the netlib.org folk (BLAS/LAPACK) have spent a *lot* of time
> thinking about linear algebra and have set up unrivalled standard APIs which
> have been implemented right down to the architecture level. It would be a
> major mistake if commons-math didn't build on their good work.
>
> I believe commons-math should move to a netlib-java backend (allowing the
> use of machine optimised BLAS/LAPACK).
>
>  http://code.google.com/p/netlib-java/
>
> The largest problems facing MTJ are support for Sparse BLAS/LAPACK and
> scalability to parallel architectures which use Parallel BLAS/LAPACK. The
> former should be possible with some work within the current API, but I fear
> major API changes would be needed for the latter. I do not want the
> commons-math API to walk into this trap without having first considered
> future architectures! MTJ has a distributed package, but I am not sure if
> this is something that is completely future proof either.
>
> What say ye'?
>
> --
> Sam
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/commons-math%2C-matrix-toolkits-java-and-consolidation-tp23537813p23537813.html
> Sent from the Commons - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>



-- 
Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon @ NHN, corp.
edwardyoon@apache.org
http://blog.udanax.org

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org


Mime
View raw message