First of all, you're really on your own as far as Python2 is concerned.
We've moved on, there is no reason to use it on anything but
unupgradable old software.
It's not clear from your message whether you saw any difference from
python3 vs "sage --python".
Could you clarify?
Could you please also say what versions of libfplll you were trying.
Dima
On Wed, Jan 11, 2023 at 4:16 PM 'Carl Richard Theodor Schneider' via
sage-devel <sage-devel@googlegroups.com> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I am one of the persons Julian meant with “we”, thus able to clarify a bit
> about the setup:
> On our servers, where we noticed the problem first, we are running Ubuntu
> with sagemath installed from their official repos. One server still had sage
> 8.1 available, which is where we noticed the discrepancy.
>
> But I was also able to reproduce this performance regression on my laptop,
> which runs NixOS. I built both sage 8.9 and sage 9.6 locally (including
> dependencies, in this case down to fplll) and was able to verify that the
> issue exists there, too.
> Additionally, I tried the recommendation from Dima, running the code with
> `sage --python`, and also used fpylll directly from python2 and python3 (as
> the demo code does not use anything besides fpylll).
>
> The running time using python3 (using the same fpylll and fplll dependencies
> as sage) was the expected short runtime, while sage took an order of
> magnitude more time.
> I think using the same fpylll/fplll files on the file system should rule out
> any slow libfplll instance, as it works fine with direct python3 usage, while
> it is slow when used from within sage.
>
> I have attached the code I used (flake.nix) to reproduce this behavior on my
> laptop, as well as the output (sage-fpylll.log) when run on my laptop. I
> assume that not everyone wants to run the code by themselves, due to it
> requiring to compile two sage versions.
>
> In the log, the most interesting lines are 40/47 showing the time for sage
> (>7s) versus line 53 showing the time for py3 (~0.5s), using the same fplll
> dependency as shown from line 55 onwards.
>
> Best Regards,
> Richard
> dim...@gmail.com schrieb am Mittwoch, 11. Januar 2023 um 15:25:23 UTC+1:
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 11, 2023 at 2:02 PM 'Julian Nowakowski' via sage-devel
>> <sage-...@googlegroups.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi Dima,
>> >
>> > thank you for your suggestion.
>> >
>> > We still think that this issue is Sage-related.
>> > We have already tried to figure out, whether the slowdown is simply an
>> > issue of fpylll.
>> > If that was the case, then the slowdown would probably be caused by one of
>> > the following two issues:
>> >
>> > 1) The newer versions of fpylll, that ship with sage9, might be much
>> > slower than the older versions, that ship with sage8.
>> > 2) Running fpylll with python2 (as in sage8) might be much faster than
>> > running it with python3 (as in sage9).
>> >
>> > To test, if that is case, we built the versions of fpylll, that ship with
>> > sage9, by ourselves.
>> > We then ran the above code in these builds, using both python2 and python3.
>> > In these runs, fpylll was just as fast as it was in sage8.x.
>> > So the slowdown is probably not caused by the differences in fpylll/python
>> > versions.
>> >
>> > It seems more likely to us that sage 9.x is doing something strange when
>> > building fpylll and that this is causing the slowdown.
>>
>> Are you using a binary distribution of Sage? We are not maintaining
>> any, so that's then
>> the question for maintainers of such a binary then.
>>
>> Then, I don't think fpylll matters here, for it's just a thin wrapper
>> for libfplll, written in C++, and the
>> LLL computations is done there, not in Python.
>>
>> It might be that you are using a slow libfplll, e.g. installed by your
>> package manager -
>> then it's likely a binary which does not use full capacities of your CPU,
>> whereas older versions of Sage have been building libfplll from source.
>>
>>
>> Without more details on your platform, it's hard to tell what exactly
>> goes wrong.
>>
>>
>> >
>> > Best,
>> > Julian
>> >
>> > dim...@gmail.com schrieb am Dienstag, 10. Januar 2023 um 17:03:27 UTC+1:
>> >>
>> >> This does not appear to be Sage-related.
>> >> You can run the code above in Python shell.
>> >> (e.g. you can start Sage's python as "sage --python")
>> >>
>> >> HTH
>> >> Dima
>> >>
>> >> On Tue, Jan 10, 2023 at 3:48 PM 'Julian Nowakowski' via sage-devel
>> >> <sage-...@googlegroups.com> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > Hi Martin,
>> >> >
>> >> > the slowdown also appears in other contexts. In particular, it also
>> >> > appears when running LLL.
>> >> > Running the following code on our machine takes approximately 1 second
>> >> > with sage 8.1 and 8.9, but approximately 10 seconds with sage 9.3 and
>> >> > 9.7.
>> >> >
>> >> > import time
>> >> > from fpylll import IntegerMatrix, LLL
>> >> >
>> >> > dim = 250
>> >> > bits = 3
>> >> >
>> >> > A = IntegerMatrix.random( dim, "uniform", bits = bits )
>> >> >
>> >> > start = time.time()
>> >> > LLL.reduction(A)
>> >> > stop = time.time()
>> >> >
>> >> > print("LLL took %f seconds." % (stop-start))
>> >> >
>> >> > Best,
>> >> > Julian
>> >> > martinr...@googlemail.com schrieb am Dienstag, 10. Januar 2023 um
>> >> > 11:57:29 UTC+1:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Hi there,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I don’t think A*B is a good benchmark for FPyLLL does the same
>> >> >> slowdown also appear for, say, LLL?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Cheers,
>> >> >> Martin
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On Tue, Jan 10 2023, 'Julian Nowakowski' via sage-devel wrote:
>> >> >> > Hi all,
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > we recently noticed that the IntegerMatrix class from fpylll is (on
>> >> >> > our
>> >> >> > hardware) much slower in sage9.x, than it is in sage8.x.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Please consider the following code snippet:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > import time
>> >> >> > from fpylll import IntegerMatrix
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > dim = 30
>> >> >> > bits = 10
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > A = IntegerMatrix.random( dim, "uniform", bits = bits )
>> >> >> > B = IntegerMatrix.random( dim, "uniform", bits = bits )
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > start = time.time()
>> >> >> > C = A*B
>> >> >> > stop = time.time()
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > print( "Multiplication took %f seconds." % (stop-start) )
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > We tried running this code in Sage 8.1, 8.9, 9.3 and 9.7. In the 8.x
>> >> >> > versions, the multiplications takes less than 0.2 seconds. In the 9.x
>> >> >> > versions, it takes more than 6 seconds.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Any ideas?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Best,
>> >> >> > Julian
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > --
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > https://juliannowakow.ski/
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> --
>> >> >>
>> >> >> _pgp: https://keybase.io/martinralbrecht
>> >> >> _www: https://malb.io
>> >> >> _prn: he/him or they/them
>> >> >>
>> >> > --
>> >> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>> >> > Groups "sage-devel" group.
>> >> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>> >> > an email to sage-devel+...@googlegroups.com.
>> >> > To view this discussion on the web visit
>> >> > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/73f9e6ea-cdc4-4d43-a2fc-abbfa144d71cn%40googlegroups.com.
>> >
>> > --
>> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> > "sage-devel" group.
>> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> > email to sage-devel+...@googlegroups.com.
>> > To view this discussion on the web visit
>> > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/d0abe8fb-d821-48b1-8aee-aa10a61754b4n%40googlegroups.com.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "sage-devel" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/0d12f15d-21ff-4d39-a2dc-1df1dd5a1684n%40googlegroups.com.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/CAAWYfq3xzrcbamXBx0JQZc%3DsXNG5XOJBs7tUx8yNNjh%3DS2K3Ag%40mail.gmail.com.
