Speeding up loops over a Numpy array - python

In my code I have for loop that indexes over a multidimensional numpy array and does some operation using the sub-array that is obtained at each iteration. It looks like this
for sub in Arr:
#do stuff using sub
Now the stuff that is done using sub is fully vectorized, so it should be efficient. On the other hand this loop iterates about ~10^5 times and is the bottleneck. Do you think I will get an improvement by offloading this part to C. I am somewhat reluctant to do so because the do stuff using sub uses broadcasting, slicing, smart-indexing tricks that would be tedious to write in plain C. I would also welcome thoughts and suggestions about how to deal with broadcasting, slicing, smart-indexing when offloading computation to C.

If you can't 'vectorize' the entire operation and looping is indeed the bottleneck, then I highly recommend using Cython. I've been dabbling around with it recently and it is straightforward to work with and has a decent interface with numpy. For something like a langevin integrator I saw a 115x speedup over a decent implementation in numpy. See the documentation here:
http://docs.cython.org/src/tutorial/numpy.html
and I also recommend looking at the following paper
You may see satisfactory speedups by just typing the input array and the loop counter, but if you want to leverage the full potential of cython, then you are going to have to hardcode the equivalent broadcasting.

San you can take a look at scipy.weave. You can use scipy.weave.blitz to transparently translate your expression into C++ code and run it. It will handle slicing automatically and get rid of temporaries, but you claim that the body of your for loop does not create temporaries so your milage may vary.
However if you want to replace your entire for loop with something more efficient then you could make use of scipy.inline. The drawback is that you have to write C++ code. This should not be too hard because you can use Blitz++ syntax which is very close to numpy array expressions. Slicing is directly supported, broadcasting however is not.
There are two work arounds:
is to use the numpy-C api and use multi-dimensional iterators. They transparently handle broadcasting. However you are invoking the Numpy runtime so there might be some overhead. The other option, and possibly the simpler option is to use the usual matrix notation for broadcasting. Broadcast operations can be written as outer-products with vector of all ones. The good thing is that Blitz++ will not actually create this temporary broadcasted arrays in memory, it will figure out how to wrap it into an equivalent loop.
For the second option take a look at http://www.oonumerics.org/blitz/docs/blitz_3.html#SEC88 for index place holders. As long as your matrix has less than 11 dimensions you are fine. This link shows how they can be used to form outer products http://www.oonumerics.org/blitz/docs/blitz_3.html#SEC99 (search for outer products to go to the relevant part of the document).

Besides using Cython, you can write the bottle-neck part(s) in Fortran. Then use f2py to compile it to Python .pyd file.

Related

Can whole line NumpyArrays indexing operations be cythonized?

In the Cython documentation under Efficient Indexing, on the gotcha part it says that:
This efficient indexing only affects certain index operations, namely
those with exactly ndim number of typed integer indices.
Does this mean that operations like
f[:, w] = something
are not optimized?
It probably meant "optimized [compared to pure Python code]". There are different kinds of slicings and most of them are already really fast in Python, there just is not much you can speed up. For example if you use f[:,w] you'll get a view of the array f. It involves a bit of overhead because a "view" has to be created but it's really fast already because it (excluding certain advanced indexing operations) just a memoryview.
However what Cython can speed up significantly is: accessing single elements of an array. That is a really inefficient operation in Python code because the element has to be "boxed as Python object" when accessed. Cython can avoid this "boxing", when "exactly ndim number of typed integer indices" are used.
So it's not like f[:,w] isn't optimized. It is already optimized by numpy. Cython can't improve (much) there.

Truly vectorized routines in python?

Are there really good methods in Python to vectorize matrix like data constructs/containers -operations? What are the according data constructs used?
(I could observe and read that pandas and numpy element-wise operations using vectorize or applymap (may also be the case of apply/apply along axis for rows/columns) are not much of a speed progress compared to for loops.
Given that when trying to use them, you have sometimes to mess with the specificities of the datatypes when it is usually a little bit easier in for loops, what are the benefits? Readability?)
Are there ways to achieve a gap of performance similar to what happens in Matlab when comparing for loops and vectorized operations?
(note it is not to bash numpy or pandas, these are great, whole matrix operations are ok, it is just that when you have to do element-wise operations, it becomes slow).
EDIT to explain the context:
I was only wondering because I received more than once answers mentionning the fact that apply and so on are actually similar to for loops. That's why I was wondering if there were similar functions implemented in such way that it would perform better. The actual problems were varied. They just had to be element-wise, actually, not "doing the sum, product, whatever of the whole matrix". I did a lot of comparisons with differential outputs sometimes based on other matrices, so I had to use complex functions for this. But since the matrices are huge and the implementation depended on "for loop like" mechanisms, in the end I felt that my program would not work well on a more important dataset. Hence my question. But I was not looking for review, only knowledge.
You need to provide a specific example.
Normal per-element MATLAB or Python functions cannot be vectorized in general. The whole point of vectorizing, in both MATLAB and Python, is to off-load the operation onto the much faster underlying C or Fortran libraries that are designed to work on arrays of uniform data. This cannot be done on functions that operate on scalars, either in MATLAB or Python.
For functions that operate on arrays or matrices as a whole (such as mathematical operators, sum, square, etc), MATLAB and Python behave the same. In fact they use most of the same underlying C and Fortran libraries to do their calculations.
So you need to show the actual operation you want to do, and then we can see if there is a way to vectorize it.
If it is working code and you just want to improve its performance, then Code Review stack exchange site is probably a better choice.

Cython: when using typed memoryviews, are Cython users supposed to implement their own library of "vector" functions?

If I am using typed memoryviews, and I want to add two vectors I am representing using such a memoryview, or take their dot-product, or other such vector things, does Cython expect me to to implement these functions on my own?
I don't have a problem with that, but I wonder if I am doing something wrong if I am busy writing add vectors/multiply by a scalar/dot products/etc. on my own. It feels like an antipattern, but I am not sure.
What is the right pattern?
If your code spends a lot of time in linear algebra functions or vectorized operations, it's probably not a very good candidate for Cythonizing.
Dot products between numpy arrays are usually performed using BLAS library calls which are already very highly optimized, and you are pretty much guaranteed to do worse if you try and reinvent the wheel in Cython*. Similarly, basic vectorized operations such as adding two vectors are already pretty efficient for numpy arrays, although in certain circumstances it might be possible to do a bit better in Cython (e.g. by exploiting parallelization, or by avoiding intermediate array allocation).
Cython is most useful for speeding up operations that can't be easily vectorized, where you would otherwise have to resort to Python for loops etc. The best approach is usually to identify and Cythonize just these bottlenecks, rather than attempting to re-write everything in Cython.
*Having said that, it is possible to call a BLAS or LAPACK function directly on a typed memoryview by passing a pointer to the first element in the array (see here and here for some examples).
Note that you can actually pass memoryviews into most numpy functions. Of course you still pay the Python call overhead, but if the memoryview is large, this may be insignificant. Example:
cdef double[:,:] A
# ... initialize A ...
x = np.sum(A)

Numpy vectorisation of python object array

Just a short question that I can't find the answer to before i head off for the day,
When i do something like this:
v1 = float_list_python = ... # <some list of floats>
v2 = float_array_NumPy = ... # <some numpy.ndarray of floats>
# I guess they don't have to be floats -
# but some object that also has a native
# object in C, so that numpy can just use
# that
If i want to multiply these vectors by a scalar, my understanding has always been that the python list is a list of object references, and so looping through the list to do the multiplication must fetch the locations of all the floats, and then must get the floats in order to do it - which is one of the reasons it's slow.
If i do the same thing in NumPy, then, well, i'm not sure what happens. There are a number of things i imagine could happen:
It splits the multpilication up across the cores.
It vectorises the multications (as well?)
The documentation i've found suggests that many of the primitives in numpy take advantage of the first option there whenever they can (i don't have a computer on hand at the moment i can test it on). And my intuition tells me that number 2 should happen whenever it's possible.
So my question is, if I create a NumPy array of python objects, will it still at least perform operations on the list in parallel? I know that if you create an array of objects that have native C types, then it will actually create a contiguous array in memory of the actual objects, and that if you create an numpy array of python objects it will create an array of references, but i don't see why this would rule out parallel operations on said list, and cannot find anywhere that explicitly states that.
EDIT: I feel there's a bit of confusion over what i'm asking. I understand what vectorisation is, I understand that it is a compiler optimisation, and not something you necesarily program in (though aligning the data such that it's contiguous in memory is important). On the grounds of vectorisation, all i wanted to know was whether or not numpy uses it. If i do something like np_array1 * np_array2 does the underlying library call use vectorisation (presuming that dtype is a compatible type).
For the splitting up over the cores, all i mean there, is if i again do something like np_array1 * np_array2, but this time dtype=object: would it divide that work up amongst there cores?
numpy is fast because it performs numeric operations like this in fast compiled C code. In contrast the list operation operates at the interpreted Python level (streamlined as much as possible with Python bytecodes etc).
A numpy array of numeric type stores those numbers in a data buffer. At least in the simple cases this is just a block of bytes that C code can step through efficiently. The array also has shape and strides information that allows multidimensional access.
When you multiply the array by a scalar, it, in effect, calls a C function titled something like 'multiply_array_by_scalar', which does the multiplication in fast compiled code. So this kind of numpy operation is fast (compared to Python list code) regardless of the number of cores or other multi-processing/threading enhancements.
Arrays of objects do not have any special speed advantage (compared to lists), at least not at this time.
Look at my answer to a question about creating an array of arrays, https://stackoverflow.com/a/28284526/901925
I had to use iteration to initialize the values.
Have you done any time experiments? For example, construct an array, say (1000,2). Use tolist() to create an equivalent list of lists. And make a similar array of objects, with each object being a (2,) array or list (how much work did that take?). Now do something simple like len(x) for each of those sub lists.
#hpaulj provided a good answer to your question. In general, from reading your question it occurred to me that you do not actually understand what "vectorization" does under the hood. This writeup is a pretty decent explanation of vectorization and how it enables faster computations - http://quantess.net/2013/09/30/vectorization-magic-for-your-computations/
With regards to point 1 - Distributing computations across multiple cores, this is not always the case with Numpy. However, there are libraries like numexpr that enable multithreaded, highly efficient Numpy array computations with support for several basic logical and arithmetic operators. Numexpr can be used to turbo charge critical computations when used in conjunction with Numpy as it avoids replicating large arrays in memory for vectorization routines (as is the case for Numpy) and can use all cores on your system to perform computations.

Will multiprocessing be a good solution for this operation?

while True:
Number = len(SomeList)
OtherList = array([None]*Number)
for i in xrange(Number):
OtherList[i] = (Numpy Array Calculation only using i_th element of arrays, Array_1, Array_2, and Array_3.)
'Number' number of elements in OtherList and other arrays can be calculated seperately.
However, as the program is time-dependent, we cannot proceed further job until every 'Number' number of elements are processed.
Will multiprocessing be a good solution for this operation?
I should to speed up this process maximally.
If it is better, please suggest the code please.
It is possible to use numpy arrays with multiprocessing but you shouldn't do it yet.
Read A beginners guide to using Python for performance computing and its Cython version: Speeding up Python (NumPy, Cython, and Weave).
Without knowing what are specific calculations or sizes of the arrays here're generic guidelines in no particular order:
measure performance of your code. Find hot-spots. Your code might load input data longer than all calculations. Set your goal, define what trade-offs are acceptable
check with automated tests that you get expected results
check whether you could use optimized libraries to solve your problem
make sure algorithm has adequate time complexity. O(n) algorithm in pure Python can be faster than O(n**2) algorithm in C for large n
use slicing and vectorized (automatic looping) calculations that replace the explicit loops in the Python-only solution.
rewrite places that need optimization using weave, f2py, cython or similar. Provide type information. Explore compiler options. Decide whether the speedup worth it to keep C extensions.
minimize allocation and data copying. Make it cache friendly.
explore whether multiple threads might be useful in your case e.g., cython.parallel.prange(). Release GIL.
Compare with multiprocessing approach. The link above contains an example how to compute different slices of an array in parallel.
Iterate
Since you have a while True clause there I will assume you will run a lot if iterations so the potential gains will eventually outweigh the slowdown from the spawning of the multiprocessing pool. I will also assume you have more than one logical core on your machine for obvious reasons. Then the question becomes if the cost of serializing the inputs and de-serializing the result is offset by the gains.
Best way to know if there is anything to be gained, in my experience, is to try it out. I would suggest that:
You pass on any constant inputs at start time. Thus, if any of Array_1, Array_2, and Array_3 never changes, pass it on as the args when calling Process(). This way you reduce the amount of data that needs to be picked and passed on via IPC (which is what multiprocessing does)
You use a work queue and add to it tasks as soon as they are available. This way, you can make sure there is always more work waiting when a process is done with a task.

Categories

Resources