Might also be something to do with this:

https://github.com/Prismatic/hiphip#performance-know-your-options



On Monday, June 15, 2015 at 3:27:59 PM UTC-7, Ritchie Cai wrote:
>
> My java was 1.8.0_05-b13. Upgraded it. Now it's around 9ms, close enough.
>
> Thanks a lot. 
>
> On Monday, June 15, 2015 at 4:59:57 PM UTC-5, Steven Yi wrote:
>>
>> I typed the array-max code and test in a REPL launched with "lein 
>> repl" in a terminal. I did do that in the root of one of my projects 
>> that had settings on to use 1.7.0 and to warn on reflection and 
>> unchecked math. When I launched just now I have these versions 
>> reported to the terminal: 
>>
>> REPL-y 0.3.5, nREPL 0.2.8 
>> Clojure 1.7.0-beta3 
>> Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM 1.8.0_45-b14 
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 2:22 PM, Ritchie Cai <ritch...@gmail.com> wrote: 
>> > Ha, you are right. That really make things a lot faster now. All three 
>> > different implementations now pretty much runs about the same speed, no 
>> one 
>> > is significantly faster or slower. Really appreciate your help. 
>> > 
>> > However, what really puzzles me at this point is that  array-max call 
>> speed. 
>> > On all the systems I have tried, both Linux and Mac, both 
>> clojure-1.7-beta3 
>> > and clojure-RC1, all using java 1.8. I get pretty much the same 
>> results, all 
>> > around 80ms no where near 4ms. Also I'm using lein repl with cider 
>> 0.8.2 , 
>> > the array-max is evaluated using cider-eval-defun-at-point (C-c C-c) 
>> > function. 
>> > 
>> > Do you mind to give some more info on how you evaluated that function? 
>> I 
>> > might be making some stupid mistake or something I'm not already know. 
>> > 
>> > On Thursday, June 11, 2015 at 11:20:42 AM UTC-5, Steven Yi wrote: 
>> >> 
>> >> I'm not sure why you'd see much slower results there.  For reference, 
>> >> I'm on a Core i7-2720-M (MacbookPro 8,1 13" early 2011), and was using 
>> >> clojure-1.7-beta3. 
>> >> 
>> >> Also, I looked at the code you posted and I'm not so sure about your 
>> >> assumption that Java arrays are slower: 
>> >> 
>> >> * in load-txt-image_array, you could probably type hint the data var 
>> >> in the first let binding as ^doubles.  With that, you should be able 
>> >> to get rid of the type hinting throughout the rest of the function. 
>> >> 
>> >> * In your areduce code you're using a vector to carry the result, 
>> >> which requires packing and unpacking, which ends up being somewhat 
>> >> like auto-boxing. Using a loop-recur would allow you to carry over the 
>> >> min and max separately between steps, something like: 
>> >> 
>> >> (let [len (alength data)] 
>> >>   (loop [i 0 my-min 0.0 my-max 0.0] 
>> >>     (if (< i len) 
>> >>        (let [v (aget data i)] 
>> >>          (recur (unchecked-inc i) (Math/min my-min v) (Math/max my-max 
>> >> v))) 
>> >>        [my-min my-max]))) 
>> >> 
>> >> (could also use min and max instead of Math/min and Math/max) 
>> >> 
>> >> * In the "update pixel values" part of the function, you're using a 
>> >> doseq with a range.  That'd cause a sequence of boxed numbers of be 
>> >> generated. Even though you have a ^double as a type hint, which will 
>> >> get you out of the boxed math warning, there's still boxing going on 
>> >> and you'll still first getting a boxed number and then have a cast to 
>> >> primitive double.  For example, if you use this function: 
>> >> 
>> >> user=> (defn a [] (doseq [i (range 50)] (println (+ ^double i 1.0)))) 
>> >> 
>> >> and use no.disassemble, you'll find byte code like this: 
>> >> 
>> >>     278  checkcast java.lang.Number [131] 
>> >>     281  invokestatic 
>> >> clojure.lang.RT.uncheckedDoubleCast(java.lang.Object) : double [135] 
>> >>     284  dconst_1 
>> >>     285  invokestatic clojure.lang.Numbers.unchecked_add(double, 
>> >> double) : double [141] 
>> >> 
>> >> I'd try using a loop-recur here as well instead of the doseq. 
>> >> 
>> >> As a sidenote, if haven't looked, you might give Prismatic's hiphip[1] 
>> >> library a try. 
>> >> 
>> >> [1] - https://github.com/prismatic/hiphip 
>> >> 
>> >> On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 5:43 AM, Ritchie Cai <ritch...@gmail.com> 
>> wrote: 
>> >> > Yup. Reflection is issue, I needed type hint. 
>> >> > However, on another note, I notice that in your first test case, 
>> your 
>> >> > evaluation takes about 3 ms, but on my machine it takes 76 ms. I'm 
>> >> > running a 
>> >> > Xeon CPU at 3.5 GHZ, clojure-1.7-RC1. What could cause such a huge 
>> >> > different 
>> >> > timing? 
>> >> > 
>> >> > Thanks. 
>> >> > 
>> >> > 
>> >> > On Wednesday, June 10, 2015 at 8:04:00 PM UTC-5, Steven Yi wrote: 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> As mentioned by Colin and Andy, I would guess it would be some form 
>> of 
>> >> >> boxing and reflection going on.  I tried the following: 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> (defn array-max [^doubles arr] 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >>   (let [len (alength arr)] 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >>     (loop [m Double/NEGATIVE_INFINITY indx 0] 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >>       (if (< indx len) 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >>         (recur (max m (aget arr indx)) (unchecked-inc indx)) 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >>         m)))) 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> user=> (let [vs (amap (double-array 1280000) idx ret 
>> (Math/random))] 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >>                (time (array-max vs))) 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> "Elapsed time: 3.719835 msecs" 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> To note, if you check out the source of areduce: 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> user=> (source areduce) 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> (defmacro areduce 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >>   "Reduces an expression across an array a, using an index named 
>> idx, 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >>   and return value named ret, initialized to init, setting ret to 
>> the 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >>   evaluation of expr at each step, returning ret." 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >>   {:added "1.0"} 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >>   [a idx ret init expr] 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >>   `(let [a# ~a] 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >>      (loop  [~idx 0 ~ret ~init] 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >>        (if (< ~idx  (alength a#)) 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >>          (recur (unchecked-inc ~idx) ~expr) 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >>          ~ret)))) 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> It's just a macro, and so typehinting is going to play a factor. 
>>  For 
>> >> >> example, with areduce and a type hint on the array: 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> (defn array-max2 [^doubles arr] 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >>   (areduce arr idx ret Double/NEGATIVE_INFINITY (max ret (aget arr 
>> >> >> idx)))) 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> user=> (let [vs (amap (double-array 1280000) idx ret 
>> (Math/random))] 
>> >> >> (time 
>> >> >> (array-max vs))) 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> "Elapsed time: 3.314599 msecs" 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> But with no type hint on arr: 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> (defn array-max2 [arr] 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >>   (areduce arr idx ret Double/NEGATIVE_INFINITY (max ret (aget arr 
>> >> >> idx)))) 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> user=> (let [vs (amap (double-array 1280000) idx ret 
>> (Math/random))] 
>> >> >> (time 
>> >> >> (array-max2 vs))) 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> "Elapsed time: 35612.919192 msecs" 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> Without a typehint on the arr argument, I also do get boxed math 
>> and 
>> >> >> reflection warnings: 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> Reflection warning, 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> 
>> /private/var/folders/0k/xj_drd990xxf4q99n2bdknrc0000gn/T/form-init1595291808747030463.clj:2:3
>>  
>>
>> >> >> - call to static method alength on clojure.lang.RT can't be 
>> resolved 
>> >> >> (argument types: unknown). 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> Boxed math warning, 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> 
>> /private/var/folders/0k/xj_drd990xxf4q99n2bdknrc0000gn/T/form-init1595291808747030463.clj:2:3
>>  
>>
>> >> >> - call: public static boolean 
>> >> >> clojure.lang.Numbers.lt(long,java.lang.Object). 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> Reflection warning, 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> 
>> /private/var/folders/0k/xj_drd990xxf4q99n2bdknrc0000gn/T/form-init1595291808747030463.clj:2:58
>>  
>>
>> >> >> - call to static method aget on clojure.lang.RT can't be resolved 
>> >> >> (argument 
>> >> >> types: unknown, int). 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> Boxed math warning, 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> 
>> /private/var/folders/0k/xj_drd990xxf4q99n2bdknrc0000gn/T/form-init1595291808747030463.clj:2:49
>>  
>>
>> >> >> - call: public static java.lang.Object 
>> >> >> clojure.lang.Numbers.max(double,java.lang.Object). 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> form-init1595291808747030463.clj:2 recur arg for primitive local: 
>> ret 
>> >> >> is 
>> >> >> not matching primitive, had: Object, needed: double 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> Auto-boxing loop arg: ret 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> Reflection warning, 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> 
>> /private/var/folders/0k/xj_drd990xxf4q99n2bdknrc0000gn/T/form-init1595291808747030463.clj:2:3
>>  
>>
>> >> >> - call to static method alength on clojure.lang.RT can't be 
>> resolved 
>> >> >> (argument types: unknown). 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> Boxed math warning, 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> 
>> /private/var/folders/0k/xj_drd990xxf4q99n2bdknrc0000gn/T/form-init1595291808747030463.clj:2:3
>>  
>>
>> >> >> - call: public static boolean 
>> >> >> clojure.lang.Numbers.lt(long,java.lang.Object). 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> Reflection warning, 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> 
>> /private/var/folders/0k/xj_drd990xxf4q99n2bdknrc0000gn/T/form-init1595291808747030463.clj:2:58
>>  
>>
>> >> >> - call to static method aget on clojure.lang.RT can't be resolved 
>> >> >> (argument 
>> >> >> types: unknown, int). 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> Boxed math warning, 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> 
>> /private/var/folders/0k/xj_drd990xxf4q99n2bdknrc0000gn/T/form-init1595291808747030463.clj:2:49
>>  
>>
>> >> >> - call: public static java.lang.Object 
>> >> >> clojure.lang.Numbers.max(java.lang.Object,java.lang.Object). 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> On Wednesday, June 10, 2015 at 4:07:09 PM UTC-4, Ritchie Cai wrote: 
>> >> >>> 
>> >> >>> I'm working on a java array of double with 1280000 elements. I 
>> need 
>> >> >>> the 
>> >> >>> max and min values of the array. So I initially tried areduce and 
>> >> >>> loop, both 
>> >> >>> gives runs around 20 seconds. But when try (apply max (vec array)) 
>> I 
>> >> >>> get 
>> >> >>> result under 90 ms. 
>> >> >>> Can anyone explain why there is such a big difference? 
>> >> >>> Also if want to iterate large java array like this to do some 
>> other 
>> >> >>> operations, e.g. convolution, what's the best way to go? Is there 
>> >> >>> another 
>> >> >>> fast way to iterate through array or do I need to convert array 
>> into 
>> >> >>> vector? 
>> >> >>> 
>> >> >>> Thanks 
>> >> >>> Ritchie 
>> >> >>> 
>> >> > -- 
>> >> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
>> >> > Groups "Clojure" group. 
>> >> > To post to this group, send email to clo...@googlegroups.com 
>> >> > Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient 
>> with 
>> >> > your 
>> >> > first post. 
>> >> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
>> >> > clojure+u...@googlegroups.com 
>> >> > For more options, visit this group at 
>> >> > http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en 
>> >> > --- 
>> >> > You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in 
>> the 
>> >> > Google Groups "Clojure" group. 
>> >> > To unsubscribe from this topic, visit 
>> >> > https://groups.google.com/d/topic/clojure/Uh64-DaPYfc/unsubscribe. 
>> >> > To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to 
>> >> > clojure+u...@googlegroups.com. 
>> >> > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. 
>> > 
>> > -- 
>> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
>> > Groups "Clojure" group. 
>> > To post to this group, send email to clo...@googlegroups.com 
>> > Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with 
>> your 
>> > first post. 
>> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
>> > clojure+u...@googlegroups.com 
>> > For more options, visit this group at 
>> > http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en 
>> > --- 
>> > You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the 
>> > Google Groups "Clojure" group. 
>> > To unsubscribe from this topic, visit 
>> > https://groups.google.com/d/topic/clojure/Uh64-DaPYfc/unsubscribe. 
>> > To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to 
>> > clojure+u...@googlegroups.com. 
>> > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. 
>>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Clojure" group.
To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your 
first post.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Clojure" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to