On 08/29/2014 11:26 AM, Elnaz wrote:
> Steven,
> Just to be thorough, I use the matrices x1, ..., x10 thousands of times
> in my code because I'm doing statistical averaging. And, each matrix is
> about 800 MB in size. I do almost exact kind of computation with each of
> them i.e. I multiply a different data vector with each matrix x1, x2,
> ..., x10. That's why I did not want to load them each, use, and clear
> them before loading the next one because loading each matrix takes 30
> sec and that is too much for my code. So, I load them all in the
> beginning of my code. Therefore, one part of the problem is the memory
> shortage which I meanwhile can solve by running my code in a remote unix
> server, and the second part of the problem is how to address each matrix
> when I need it. Thank you very much for your answer above. Let me know
> if you have any suggestion as to what is the best solution.
Again, a _small_ example would undoubtedly be a useful adjunct to
specific suggestions, but I see no reason why Steven's structure
solution wouldn't work (nor, fundamentally, with the cell arrays,
either, for that matter).
And, depending on the size questions of the various x, doesn't seem to
me that we've yet eliminated entirely the higher-dimensionality plain
ol' array yet, either, for certain.
--
> Steven,
> Just to be thorough, I use the matrices x1, ..., x10 thousands of times
> in my code because I'm doing statistical averaging. And, each matrix is
> about 800 MB in size. I do almost exact kind of computation with each of
> them i.e. I multiply a different data vector with each matrix x1, x2,
> ..., x10. That's why I did not want to load them each, use, and clear
> them before loading the next one because loading each matrix takes 30
> sec and that is too much for my code. So, I load them all in the
> beginning of my code. Therefore, one part of the problem is the memory
> shortage which I meanwhile can solve by running my code in a remote unix
> server, and the second part of the problem is how to address each matrix
> when I need it. Thank you very much for your answer above. Let me know
> if you have any suggestion as to what is the best solution.
Again, a _small_ example would undoubtedly be a useful adjunct to
specific suggestions, but I see no reason why Steven's structure
solution wouldn't work (nor, fundamentally, with the cell arrays,
either, for that matter).
And, depending on the size questions of the various x, doesn't seem to
me that we've yet eliminated entirely the higher-dimensionality plain
ol' array yet, either, for certain.
--