-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5.6k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
make test-linalg fails #5472
Comments
The Woodbury identity code hasn't been changed in a long while; I'm a little surprised that one of its tests is complaining now. |
The tolerance criterion was changed here, but I am not sure why it should affect the results on a 32 bit machine. I think the matrices should be identical on 32 and 64 bit. |
|
It fails when the matrices are of type Int32. One problem is that srand(123);rand(1:100) produces different numbers with 32 or 64 bit, so the matrices are differ from the beginning. |
@mschauer Could you upload the matrix that is being used to a gist or something? Then we could run the same matrix through a 64-bit version of julia and see if the issue appears there as well. This could just be a case of random numbers lining up such that they escape our bounds (Which really means that we need to loosen our bounds some) |
This is easiest.
Check:
|
New 32-bit failures noted when setting |
I'm not the least bit surprised, since a) you are generating a new subset of matrices to test our routines against, which is not dissimilar from changing the random seed, and b) most of our tests use tolerance bounds that are exceedingly heuristic. It is too easy to take the easy way out by continually loosening the test criteria ad infinitum, ad nauseam, ad mortem, but a proper fix to this issue will have to involve overhauling most of the linear algebra tests. Suffice to say, this will not be an easy task. |
Actually, the new failure was an overflow in calculating the determinant of a Int32 Tridiagonal matrix on a 32-bit machine. What is the proposed strategy for users to detect and/or guard against and/or be notified of integer overflow? Silently returning inaccurate (mod typemax + 1) determinants is problematic. |
Error update: (Xref JuliaLang/LinearAlgebra.jl#67 )
|
Error update: (Xref JuliaLang/LinearAlgebra.jl#67 , JuliaLang/LinearAlgebra.jl#79 , #5902 )
|
It's been a long time since Latest error update:
|
Fixed by PR #5902 ? |
The test has been passing for a while now. I don't know of a reason to keep this open. |
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: