# Help improving the performance of my implementation of a lower diagonal storage

**URL:** https://discourse.julialang.org/t/help-improving-the-performance-of-my-implementation-of-a-lower-diagonal-storage/132867
**Category:** Performance
**Created:** [October 3, 2025, 9:12pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/help-improving-the-performance-of-my-implementation-of-a-lower-diagonal-storage/132867 "2025-10-03T21:12:57Z")
**Posts on this page:** 1
**Showing post:** 7

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![stevengj](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/stevengj/32/71_2.png) [@stevengj](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/stevengj)
#### Post date: [October 3, 2025, 11:02pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/help-improving-the-performance-of-my-implementation-of-a-lower-diagonal-storage/132867/7 "2025-10-03T23:02:47Z")

</div>

See also the discussion in this thread: [Triangular Arrays in julia? - #27 by mkborregaard](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/triangular-arrays-in-julia/930/27)

My feeling is that the factor of 2 storage benefit is not going to be worth it for the performance degradation of giving up BLAS, _if_ you want to do linear algebra (e.g. triangular solves) with the matrix. YMMV depending on what you want to do with the array.

---

_[View the full topic](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/help-improving-the-performance-of-my-implementation-of-a-lower-diagonal-storage/132867)._