It looks like SharedArray(filename, T, dims) isn't documented, 
but SharedArray(T, dims; init=false, pids=Int[]) is. What's the difference? 

On Friday, November 6, 2015 at 2:21:01 AM UTC-8, Tim Holy wrote:
>
> Not sure if it's as high-level as you're hoping for, but julia has great 
> support for arrays that are much bigger than memory. See Mmap.mmap and 
> SharedArray(filename, T, dims). 
>
> --Tim 
>
> On Thursday, November 05, 2015 06:33:52 PM André Lage wrote: 
> > hi Viral, 
> > 
> > Do you have any news on this? 
> > 
> > André Lage. 
> > 
> > On Wednesday, July 3, 2013 at 5:12:06 AM UTC-3, Viral Shah wrote: 
> > > Hi all, 
> > > 
> > > I am cross-posting my reply to julia-stats and julia-users as there 
> was a 
> > > separate post on large logistic regressions on julia-users too. 
> > > 
> > > Just as these questions came up, Tanmay and I have been chatting about 
> a 
> > > general framework for working on problems that are too large to fit in 
> > > memory, or need parallelism for performance. The idea is simple and 
> based 
> > > on providing a convenient and generic way to break up a problem into 
> > > subproblems, each of which can then be scheduled to run anywhere. To 
> start 
> > > with, we will implement a map and mapreduce using this, and we hope 
> that 
> > > it 
> > > should be able to handle large files sequentially, distributed data 
> > > in-memory, and distributed filesystems within the same framework. Of 
> > > course, this all sounds too good to be true. We are trying out a 
> simple 
> > > implementation, and if early results are promising, we can have a 
> detailed 
> > > discussion on API design and implementation. 
> > > 
> > > Doug, I would love to see if we can use some of this work to 
> parallelize 
> > > GLM at a higher level than using remotecall and fetch. 
> > > 
> > > -viral 
> > > 
> > > On Tuesday, July 2, 2013 11:10:35 PM UTC+5:30, Douglas Bates wrote: 
> > >> On Tuesday, July 2, 2013 6:26:33 AM UTC-5, Raj DG wrote: 
> > >>> Hi all, 
> > >>> 
> > >>> I am a regular user of R and also use it for handling very large 
> data 
> > >>> sets (~ 50 GB). We have enough RAM to fit all that data into memory 
> for 
> > >>> processing, so don't really need to do anything additional to chunk, 
> > >>> etc. 
> > >>> 
> > >>> I wanted to get an idea of whether anyone has, in practice, 
> performed 
> > >>> analysis on large data sets using Julia. Use cases range from 
> performing 
> > >>> Cox Regression on ~ 40 million rows and over 10 independent 
> variables to 
> > >>> simple statistical analysis using T-Tests, etc. Also, how does the 
> > >>> timings 
> > >>> for operations like logistic regressions compare to Julia ? Are 
> there 
> > >>> any 
> > >>> libraries/packages that can perform Cox, Poisson (Negative 
> Binomial), 
> > >>> and 
> > >>> other regression types ? 
> > >>> 
> > >>> The benchmarks for Julia look promising, but in today's age of the 
> "big 
> > >>> data", it seems that the capability of handling large data is a 
> > >>> pre-requisite to the future success of any new platform or language. 
> > >>> Looking forward to your feedback, 
> > >> 
> > >> I think the potential for working with large data sets in Julia is 
> better 
> > >> than that in R.  Among other things Julia allows for memory-mapped 
> files 
> > >> and for distributed arrays, both of which have great potential. 
> > >> 
> > >> I have been working with some Biostatisticians on a prototype package 
> for 
> > >> working with snp data of the sort generated in genome-wide 
> association 
> > >> studies.  Current data sizes can be information on tens of thousands 
> of 
> > >> individuals (rows) for over a million snp positions (columns).  The 
> > >> nature 
> > >> of the data is such that each position provides one of four potential 
> > >> values, including a missing value.  A compact storage format using 2 
> bits 
> > >> per position is widely used for such data.  We are able to read and 
> > >> process 
> > >> such a large array in a few seconds using memory-mapped files in 
> Julia. 
> > >> 
> > >>  The amazing thing is that the code is pure Julia.  When I write in R 
> I 
> > >>  am 
> > >> 
> > >> always conscious of the bottlenecks and the need to write C or C++ 
> code 
> > >> for 
> > >> those places.  I haven't encountered cases where I need to write new 
> code 
> > >> in a compiled language to speed up a Julia function.  I have 
> interfaced 
> > >> to 
> > >> existing numerical libraries but not writing fresh code. 
> > >> 
> > >> As John mentioned I have written the GLM package allowing for hooks 
> to 
> > >> use distributed arrays.  As yet I haven't had a large enough problem 
> to 
> > >> warrant fleshing out those hooks but I could be persuaded. 
>
>

Reply via email to