From dev-return-2362-apmail-systemml-dev-archive=systemml.apache.org@systemml.apache.org Sat Mar 10 09:42:54 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-systemml-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-systemml-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C2BD418FD9 for ; Sat, 10 Mar 2018 09:42:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 45723 invoked by uid 500); 10 Mar 2018 09:42:54 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-systemml-dev-archive@systemml.apache.org Received: (qmail 45670 invoked by uid 500); 10 Mar 2018 09:42:54 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@systemml.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@systemml.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@systemml.apache.org Received: (qmail 45658 invoked by uid 99); 10 Mar 2018 09:42:53 -0000 Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd2-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 10 Mar 2018 09:42:53 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd2-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd2-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 612151A067C for ; Sat, 10 Mar 2018 09:42:53 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd2-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 2.129 X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.129 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, HTML_MESSAGE=2, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=disabled Authentication-Results: spamd2-us-west.apache.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mx1-lw-eu.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd2-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.9]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GzVXG9-tMsuz for ; Sat, 10 Mar 2018 09:42:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-vk0-f50.google.com (mail-vk0-f50.google.com [209.85.213.50]) by mx1-lw-eu.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-lw-eu.apache.org) with ESMTPS id 7C0995F4AA for ; Sat, 10 Mar 2018 09:42:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-vk0-f50.google.com with SMTP id n82so3593866vkf.7 for ; Sat, 10 Mar 2018 01:42:51 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=mwLISpllRK4gAevAy33a4qYZMWtb9iJQSpt5su21bcQ=; b=kXfdLkUZTlJhji0756giFtoHBvbzRFUEqwwm2HkVHzcLpFjNVdgXBaacwf6rUpAbXv 6/Rp1/UooImExUYZr6zyDswlrruHoezVBdhTKopxA4n/UFEBuOrbTbn2uC5OPBldJLha Fd0cWf1u/ndHHAf/vZ/7hgQsZi6oCeOQWglILBt+W0TTx7j3NgqDfbW+LsrfqtRSyap+ /CnwL9HrDeZEPd+WUrEKKSHY+yr19rHdCJDT/xdWvzjjsQ1BxFUWC0+lL1y2D33DEGBY lNPsZB42UgtoBDlB0d4z3qJQIk6MCx+ZeXM4wxQ2Tp2y5qITWQgALTPLdqkV4DQRIBiu gJig== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=mwLISpllRK4gAevAy33a4qYZMWtb9iJQSpt5su21bcQ=; b=Hu0EkNtiTf25G/cApD8VsND+cb6DYS/+sOWIsnHNNlRzuelaqHSiuxWZ8ZBHVqyZQe xUSjTIFrb+gjmeQEH71ME18/H7SX3kbUCdKdKIlpuQYuLkHKNLrDJf52QXIOOwJJpGV3 h2pYUs+3GObsAYGVPqlDGGkmjyhbDeA6HwcfSJTfbeaj7OTfVcR5ikBhcBEHn7VJrRom +XsvmSKiVriKqenM6k/omlLHx1V0UYB4ZpZPbdFhm7Cu+JS6I7rb5XXM0hP3H+TBRsEU Cw9+SAy2OdQV4jLmEi3XIyRDs/Q3bXskG2DhjYFC2LddxMHy5B7eWftZBj0H1q3DOf3v Pztw== X-Gm-Message-State: AElRT7GzDy/WfhNuwyFzeY9CQZnFKduCkps31WIXkcPA3fljfdHUyAHq 2jMz90wP2XTxUGbZM4soEFrynJ/h6pIqfeZYaw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AG47ELsssqL21rIMxYuyUYzY6ou/4OAGQ4c0cLrZ66w5dFgqqpWjlXmP5VgOWS3syTBH02eaS43loNrEWliOAylRHTg= X-Received: by 10.31.174.1 with SMTP id x1mr813848vke.25.1520674964312; Sat, 10 Mar 2018 01:42:44 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.176.0.181 with HTTP; Sat, 10 Mar 2018 01:42:43 -0800 (PST) From: Matthias Boehm Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2018 01:42:43 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] integrated testing for MLContext, SPARK, codegen. To: Janardhan Pulivarthi Cc: dev@systemml.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a1144067611186d05670bbb85" --001a1144067611186d05670bbb85 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Hi Janardhan, in general, we prefer to compare against R because it helps detecting issues that are common across different optimizers and execution modes. So for small scripts like PCA, I would recommend to simply create an R script, which should be very similar to the dml script. However, for more complex scripts with lots of table, removeEmpty, and matrix-vector operations, creating the R scripts can be tedious and error-prone because it requires additional operations such as vector replications. For such case (including some existing tests), we could indeed compare the different modes (e.g., w/ and w/o codegen). Let's decide that case by case. Regarding MLContext, yes it would be good to extend the algorithm test coverage by simply reusing the dml and R scripts from the existing application or codegen tests. Regards, Matthias On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 9:52 PM, Janardhan Pulivarthi < janardhan.pulivarthi@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > Matthias - > 1. We are checking the values of codegen algorithms with the R script, but > can we compare > > ` pca script with [codegen_disabled] = pca script with [codegen_enabled]` > > > Deron - > 1. The same way can we compare the result through MLContext invocation > with other mode of running the script. > > > Thanks, > Janardhan > --001a1144067611186d05670bbb85--