I'm working on an algorithm, and I've made no attempt to parallelize it other than just by using numpy/scipy. Looking at htop, sometimes the code uses all of my cores and sometimes just one. I'm considering adding parallelism to the single-threaded portions using multiprocessing or something similar.
Assuming that I have all of the parallel BLAS/MKL libraries, is there some rule of thumb that I can follow to guess whether a numpy/scipy ufunc is going to be multithreaded or not? Even better, is there some place where this is documented?
To try to figure this out, I've looked at: https://scipy.github.io/old-wiki/pages/ParallelProgramming, Python: How do you stop numpy from multithreading?, multithreaded blas in python/numpy.
You may try to take IDP package (Intel® Distribution for Python) which contains versions of NumPy*, SciPy*, and scikit-learn* with integrated Intel® Math Kernel Library.
This would give you threading of all Lapack routines automatically whether this make sense to do.
Here you find out the list of threaded mkl’s functions :
https://software.intel.com/en-us/mkl-linux-developer-guide-openmp-threaded-functions-and-problems
The routines intrinsic to numpy and scipy allow single threads by default. You can change that if you so choose.
# encoding: utf-8
# module numpy.core.multiarray
# from /path/to/anaconda/lib/python3.6/site-packages/numpy/core/multiarray.cpython-36m-darwin.so
# by generator 1.145
# no doc
# no imports
# Variables with simple values
ALLOW_THREADS = 1
When compiling numpy, you can control threading by changing NPY_ALLOW_THREADS:
./core/include/numpy/ufuncobject.h:#if NPY_ALLOW_THREADS
./core/include/numpy/ndarraytypes.h: #define NPY_ALLOW_THREADS 1
As for the external libraries, I've mostly found numpy and scipy to wrap around legacy Fortran code (QUADPACK, LAPACK, FITPACK ... so on). All the subroutines in these libraries compute on single threads.
As for the MKL dependencies, the SO posts you link to sufficiently answer the question.
please try to set the global variable OMP_NUM_THREADS. It works for my scipy and numpy. The functions I use are,
ling.inv() and A.dot(B)
Related
I want to compute magnetic fields of some conductors using the Biot–Savart law and I want to use a 1000x1000x1000 matrix. Before I use MATLAB, but now I want to use Python. Is Python slower than MATLAB ? How can I make Python faster?
EDIT:
Maybe the best way is to compute the big array with C/C++ and then transfering them to Python. I want to visualise then with VPython.
EDIT2: Which is better in my case: C or C++?
You might find some useful results at the bottom of this link
http://wiki.scipy.org/PerformancePython
From the introduction,
A comparison of weave with NumPy, Pyrex, Psyco, Fortran (77 and 90) and C++ for solving Laplace's equation.
It also compares MATLAB and seems to show similar speeds to when using Python and NumPy.
Of course this is only a specific example, your application might be allow better or worse performance. There is no harm in running the same test on both and comparing.
You can also compile NumPy with optimized libraries such as ATLAS which provides some BLAS/LAPACK routines. These should be of comparable speed to MATLAB.
I'm not sure if the NumPy downloads are already built against it, but I think ATLAS will tune libraries to your system if you compile NumPy,
http://www.scipy.org/Installing_SciPy/Windows
The link has more details on what is required under the Windows platform.
EDIT:
If you want to find out what performs better, C or C++, it might be worth asking a new question. Although from the link above C++ has best performance. Other solutions are quite close too i.e. Pyrex, Python/Fortran (using f2py) and inline C++.
The only matrix algebra under C++ I have ever done was using MTL and implementing an Extended Kalman Filter. I guess, though, in essence it depends on the libraries you are using LAPACK/BLAS and how well optimised it is.
This link has a list of object-oriented numerical packages for many languages.
http://www.oonumerics.org/oon/
NumPy and MATLAB both use an underlying BLAS implementation for standard linear algebra operations. For some time both used ATLAS, but nowadays MATLAB apparently also comes with other implementations like Intel's Math Kernel Library (MKL). Which one is faster by how much depends on the system and how the BLAS implementation was compiled. You can also compile NumPy with MKL and Enthought is working on MKL support for their Python distribution (see their roadmap). Here is also a recent interesting blog post about this.
On the other hand, if you need more specialized operations or data structures then both Python and MATLAB offer you various ways for optimization (like Cython, PyCUDA,...).
Edit: I corrected this answer to take into account different BLAS implementations. I hope it is now a fair representation of the current situation.
The only valid test is to benchmark it. It really depends on what your platform is, and how well the Biot-Savart Law maps to Matlab or NumPy/SciPy built-in operations.
As for making Python faster, Google's working on Unladen Swallow, a JIT compiler for Python. There are probably other projects like this as well.
As per your edit 2, I recommend very strongly that you use Fortran because you can leverage the available linear algebra subroutines (Lapack and Blas) and it is way simpler than C/C++ for matrix computations.
If you prefer to go with a C/C++ approach, I would use C, because you presumably need raw performance on a presumably simple interface (matrix computations tend to have simple interfaces and complex algorithms).
If, however, you decide to go with C++, you can use the TNT (the Template Numerical Toolkit, the C++ implementation of Lapack).
Good luck.
If you're just using Python (with NumPy), it may be slower, depending on which pieces you use, whether or not you have optimized linear algebra libraries installed, and how well you know how to take advantage of NumPy.
To make it faster, there are a few things you can do. There is a tool called Cython that allows you to add type declarations to Python code and translate it into a Python extension module in C. How much benefit this gets you depends a bit on how diligent you are with your type declarations - if you don't add any at all, you won't see much of any benefit. Cython also has support for NumPy types, though these are a bit more complicated than other types.
If you have a good graphics card and are willing to learn a bit about GPU computing, PyCUDA can also help. (If you don't have an nvidia graphics card, I hear there is a PyOpenCL in the works as well). I don't know your problem domain, but if it can be mapped into a CUDA problem then it should be able to handle your 10^9 elements nicely.
And here is an updated "comparison" between MATLAB and NumPy/MKL based on some linear algebra functions:
http://dpinte.wordpress.com/2010/03/16/numpymkl-vs-matlab-performance/
The dot product is not that slow ;-)
I couldn't find much hard numbers to answer this same question so I went ahead and did the testing myself. The results, scripts, and data sets used are all available here on my post on MATLAB vs Python speed for vibration analysis.
Long story short, the FFT function in MATLAB is better than Python but you can do some simple manipulation to get comparable results and speed. I also found that importing data was faster in Python compared to MATLAB (even for MAT files using the scipy.io).
I would also like to point out that Python (+NumPy) can easily interface with Fortran via the F2Py module, which basically nets you native Fortran speeds on the pieces of code you offload into it.
I've been using numpy for quite some time now and am fond of just how much faster it is for simple operations on vectors and matrices, compared to e.g. looping over elements of the same array.
My understanding is that it is using SIMD CPU extensions, but according to some, at least some of its functionality is making use of multiprocessing (via openMP?). On the other hand, there are lots of questions here on SO (example) about speeding operations on numpy arrays up by using multiprocessing.
I have not seen numpy definitely use multiple cores at once, although it looks as if sometimes two cores (on an 8-core machine) are in use. But I may have been using the "wrong" functions for that, or using them in the wrong way, or maybe my matrices are too small to make it worth it?
The question therefore:
Are there some numpy functions which can use multiple processes on a shared-memory machine, either via openMP or some other means?
If yes, is there some place in the numpy documentation with a definite list of those functions?
And in that case, is there some documentation on what a user of numpy would have to do to make sure they use all available CPU cores, or some specific predetermined number of cores?
I'm aware that there are libraries which permit splitting numpy arrays and such up across multiple machines or compute nodes, but I suspect the use case for that is either with being able to handle more data than fits into local RAM, or speeding processing up more than what a single multi-core machine can achieve. This is however not what this question is about.
Update
Given the comment by #talonmies (who states that by default there's no such functionality in numpy, and it would depend on LAPACK and BLAS):
What's the easiest way to obtain a suitably-compiled numpy version which makes use of multiple CPU cores (and hopefully also SIMD extensions)?
Or is the reason why numpy doesn't usually multiprocess that most people for whom that is important have already switched to using Multiprocessing or things like dask to handle multiple cores explicitly rather than having only the numpy bits accelerated implicitly?
I am looking for a Pythonic realization of Expokit, which is a software package that provides matrix exponential routines for small dense or very large sparse matrices, real or complex, i.e. it finds
w(t) = exp(t*A)*v
This package had been realized in Fortran and Matlab and can be found here https://www.maths.uq.edu.au/expokit/
I have found a python wrapper expokitpy
https://github.com/weinbe58/expokitpy and a Krylov subspace methods package KryPy https://github.com/andrenarchy/krypy. Both seem to be relevant, however neither of them goes with good enough documentation (for me) to do time-evolution.
Does somebody have a working solution with the packages mentioned above or similar?
In case this is still useful to someone, it looks like there was an effort to incorporate expokit within scipy which has now stalled and is looking for somebody to finish. Though here are some instructions to compile with Fortran and then run via Python, with good results.
It seems also to have been adopted by slepc4py, which is then used by quimb, which seems useful if you need it for quantum information (or just use its expm and expm_multiply methods).
Does anyone know if there is a Python-based procedure to decompose time series utilizing STL (Seasonal-Trend-Loess) method?
I saw references to a wrapper program to call the stl function
in R, but I found that to be unstable and cumbersome from the environment set-up perspective (Python and R together). Also, link was 4 years old.
Can someone point out something more recent (e.g. sklearn, spicy, etc.)?
I haven't tried STLDecompose but I took a peek at it and I believe it uses a general purpose loess smoother. This is hard to do right and tends to be inefficient. See the defunct STL-Java repo.
The pyloess package provides a python wrapper to the same underlying Fortran that is used by the original R version. You definitely don't need to go through a bridge to R to get this same functionality! This package is not actively maintained and I've occasionally had trouble getting it to build on some platforms (thus the fork here). But once built, it does work and is the fastest one you're likely to find. I've been tempted to modify it to include some new features, but just can't bring myself to modify the Fortran (which is pre-processed RATFOR - very assembly-language like Fortran, and I can't find a RATFOR preprocessor anywhere).
I wrote a native Java implementation, stl-decomp-4j, that can be called from python using the pyjnius package. This started as a direct port of the original Fortran, refactored to a more modern programming style. I then extended it to allow quadratic loess interpolation and to support post-decomposition smoothing of the seasonal component, features that are described in the original paper but that were not put into the Fortran/R implementation. (They apparently are in the S-plus implementation, but few of us have access to that.) The key to making this efficient is that the loess smoothing simplifies when the points are equidistant and the point-by-point smoothing is done by simply modifying the weights that one is using to do the interpolation.
The stl-decomp-4j examples include one Jupyter notebook demonstrating how to call this package from python. I should probably formalize that as a python package but haven't had time. Quite willing to accept pull requests. ;-)
I'd love to see a direct port of this approach to python/numpy. Another thing on my "if I had some spare time" list.
Here you can find an example of Seasonal-Trend decomposition using LOESS (STL), from statsmodels.
Basicaly it works this way:
from statsmodels.tsa.seasonal import STL
stl = STL(TimeSeries, seasonal=13)
res = stl.fit()
fig = res.plot()
There is indeed:
https://github.com/jrmontag/STLDecompose
In the repo you will find a jupyter notebook for usage of the package.
RSTL is a Python port of R's STL: https://github.com/ericist/rstl. It works pretty well except it is 3~5 times slower than R's STL according to the author.
If you just want to get lowess trend line, you can just use Statsmodels' lowess function
https://www.statsmodels.org/dev/generated/statsmodels.nonparametric.smoothers_lowess.lowess.html.
I am trying to figure out explicitly which of the functions in SciPy/NumPy run on multiple processors. I can e.g. read in the SciPy reference manual that SciPy uses this, but I am more interested in exactly which functions do run parallel computations, because not all of them do. The dream scenario would of course be if it is included when you type help(SciPy.foo), but this does not seem to be the case.
Any help will be much appreciated.
Best,
Matias
I think the question is better addressed to the BLAS/LAPACK libraries you use rather than to SciPy/NumPy.
Some BLAS/LAPACK libraries, such as MKL, use multiple cores natively where other implementations might not.
To take scipy.linalg.solve as an example, here's its source code (with some error handling code omitted for clarity):
def solve(a, b, sym_pos=0, lower=0, overwrite_a=0, overwrite_b=0,
debug = 0):
if sym_pos:
posv, = get_lapack_funcs(('posv',),(a1,b1))
c,x,info = posv(a1,b1,
lower = lower,
overwrite_a=overwrite_a,
overwrite_b=overwrite_b)
else:
gesv, = get_lapack_funcs(('gesv',),(a1,b1))
lu,piv,x,info = gesv(a1,b1,
overwrite_a=overwrite_a,
overwrite_b=overwrite_b)
if info==0:
return x
if info>0:
raise LinAlgError, "singular matrix"
raise ValueError,\
'illegal value in %-th argument of internal gesv|posv'%(-info)
As you can see, it's just a thin wrapper around two families of LAPACK functions (exemplified by DPOSV and DGESV).
There is no parallelism going on at the SciPy level, yet you observe the function using multiple cores on your system. The only possible explanation is that your LAPACK library is capable of using multiple cores, without NumPy/SciPy doing anything to make this happen.