conclusion upd.

rasbt · rasbt · commit b75d40b8cb8e · 2014-06-20T23:12:26.000-04:00
diff --git a/tutorials/multiprocessing_intro.ipynb b/tutorials/multiprocessing_intro.ipynb
@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 {
  "metadata": {
   "name": "",
-  "signature": "sha256:4b992169e84879b172c1ddfadf3f353a3812b16f9d4e448fc4aa443cbd3db9da"
+  "signature": "sha256:a96ed2f762cf56d93a4e5345428c7db5ec576916158ce54446dfdf837ec7e505"
  },
  "nbformat": 3,
  "nbformat_minor": 0,
@@ -1129,9 +1129,20 @@
      "cell_type": "markdown",
      "metadata": {},
      "source": [
-      "We can see that we could speed up the density estimations for our Parzen-window function if we submitted them in parallel. However, on my particular machine it 6 processes didn't lead to a further performance improvement, which makes sense for a 4-core CPU. \n",
-      "This even lead to a slightly worse performance, because of an additional overhead for communicating between the additional processes."
+      "We can see that we could speed up the density estimations for our Parzen-window function if we submitted them in parallel. However, on my particular machine, the submission of 6 parallel 6 processes doesn't lead to a further performance improvement, which makes sense for a 4-core CPU.  \n",
+      "We also notice that there was a significant performance increase when we were using 3 instead of only 2 processes in parallel. However, the performance increase was less significant when we moved up to 4 parallel processes, respectively.  \n",
+      "This can be attributed to the fact that in this case, the CPU consists of only 4 cores, and system processes, such as the operating system, are also running in the background. Thus, the fourth core simply does not have enough capacity left to further increase the performance of the fourth process to a large extend. And we also have to keep in mind that every additional process comes with an additional overhead for inter-process communication.  \n",
+      "\n",
+      "Also, an improvement due to parallel processing only makes sense if our tasks are \"CPU-bound\" where the majority of the task is spent in the CPU in contrast to I/O bound tasks, i.e., tasks that are processing data from a disk. "
      ]
+    },
+    {
+     "cell_type": "code",
+     "collapsed": false,
+     "input": [],
+     "language": "python",
+     "metadata": {},
+     "outputs": []
     }
    ],
    "metadata": {}
