Скачать или смотреть Understanding the Dramatic Impact of Small Changes in Numba Parallel Functions

Learn why minor modifications can lead to significant variations in performance when using Numba for parallel computing in Python.
---
This video is based on the question https://stackoverflow.com/q/75637278/ asked by the user 'Cavenfish' ( https://stackoverflow.com/u/8667071/ ) and on the answer https://stackoverflow.com/a/75638693/ provided by the user 'Jérôme Richard' ( https://stackoverflow.com/u/12939557/ ) at 'Stack Overflow' website. Thanks to these great users and Stackexchange community for their contributions.

Visit these links for original content and any more details, such as alternate solutions, latest updates/developments on topic, comments, revision history etc. For example, the original title of the Question was: Why do small changes have dramatic effects on the runtime of my numba parallel function?

Also, Content (except music) licensed under CC BY-SA https://meta.stackexchange.com/help/l...
The original Question post is licensed under the 'CC BY-SA 4.0' ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/... ) license, and the original Answer post is licensed under the 'CC BY-SA 4.0' ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/... ) license.

If anything seems off to you, please feel free to write me at vlogize [AT] gmail [DOT] com.
---
Why Do Small Changes Have Dramatic Effects on Numba Parallel Functions?

When working with Numba to parallelize functions in Python, you may notice that slight modifications in your code can lead to dramatic differences in runtime performance. A common scenario involves changes related to how arrays are accessed or how functions are defined. This article will delve into one particular case study, helping to clarify why these differences occur and offering insights into best practices when optimizing for performance.

The Problem: Sensitivity to Array Access Patterns

One Python programmer raised an interesting question about their Numba parallel function which didn't behave as expected. They observed that their function performed better with fewer CPU cores in some cases. This surprising performance fluctuation prompted them to analyze how small code changes could lead to substantial performance impacts.

Example Code

To illustrate the performance concerns, consider the following Numba function intended for parallel execution:

[[See Video to Reveal this Text or Code Snippet]]

This initial implementation may produce results, but the inquiries into its efficiency revealed room for improvement by merely altering how the array is indexed. Changing the line x[i] to x[i, :] led to better performance due to the following reasons:

Understanding the Effects of Slicing on Performance

Key Factors: Allocations and Inlining

1. Array Allocation Costs

The primary reason for the observed performance difference relates to allocations. In Numba, using x[i] as opposed to x[i, :] may trigger an array allocation that adds overhead to the processing, especially within a parallelized loop. Allocating memory in a parallel context often leads to contention issues, negatively impacting efficiency since resource access can be serialized.

2. Compiler Optimization Limitations

Numba employs Just-In-Time (JIT) compilation to optimize the execution of code at runtime. However, when zeros(3) was called within the lambda function, the compiler could not fully optimize this allocation due to it being an external function. This resulted in unnecessary copying and memory management overhead during execution.

The Impact of External Functions

The performance degradation was even more pronounced when the lambda function was converted into a separate JIT-compiled function:

[[See Video to Reveal this Text or Code Snippet]]

In this case, even though the function was optimized, execution speed decreased because the overhead from calling an external function negated the benefits of JIT compilation.

Solutions for Improved Performance

Optimize with Inlining

Keep Functions Within Context
Retain the definition of computationally intensive functions as inner functions to take advantage of inlining, which allows for crucial compiler optimizations.

Control Memory Allocations
Avoid unnecessary memory allocations within hot loops. Whenever feasible, use preallocated arrays or manipulate slices directly.

Inline Function Requests
When necessary, especially for functions that do not need to remain external, consider using Numba’s inlining feature to encourage the compiler to merge function calls, thus improving execution speed. You can request always inlining by using the inline parameter in the decorates.

Revised Example for Optimal Performance

[[See Video to Reveal this Text or Code Snippet]]

In this revision, we discover how consolidating the lambda function back into the primary function enhances execution speed and scalability.

Conclusion

The findings illustrate that small changes in how arrays are handled can have dramatic effects on a program's performance when utilizing Numba