From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Brian Gough <bjg@network-theory.co.uk>
To: Kai Trukenmueller <trukenm@ag2.mechanik.tu-darmstadt.de>
Cc: gsl-discuss@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: gsl_multifit
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 13:20:00 -0000
Message-id: <15309.21550.715964.974298@debian>
References: <20011016225100.A6728@abb121.ram1st.wh.tu-darmstadt.de> <15308.43367.776262.834557@debian> <20011017013629.A7648@abb121.ram1st.wh.tu-darmstadt.de>
X-SW-Source: 2001/msg00613.html

Kai Trukenmueller writes:
 > I benchmarked the programs on system with Athlon 1GHz, 640MB running Linux-2.4.10 with the following results:
 > 
 > Dimensions	(120,80)  (300,200)  (600,400)  (900,600)  (1200,800)
 > Octave-Script	0.060s    0.410s      3.390s     12.260s    39.790s
 > Compiled gsl    0.110s    2.240s      31.310s    2m7.590s   seg.fault
 > 
 > The gsl routine not just turns out to be much slower, it also seems to
 > be `instable' for higher orders (the results do not convege -> inft..)
 > Maybe sth. is wrong in my code. For low-orders (~<500) both results are
 > equivalent.

Regarding the segfault, your program contains some fixed length arrays
which are accessed outside the array bounds -- if you allocate them
dynamically that problem should go away.