R bigmemory always use backing file? -


we trying use bigmemory library foreach parallel our analysis. however, as.big.matrix function seems use backingfile. our workstations have enough memory, there way use bigmemory without backing file?

this code x.big.desc <-describe(as.big.matrix(x)) pretty slow write data c:\programdata\boost_interprocess\. somehow slower save x directly, as.big.matrix have slower i/o?

this code x.big.desc <-describe(as.big.matrix(x, backingfile = "")) pretty fast, however, save copy of data %tmp% directory. think reason fast, because r kick off background writing process, instead of writing data. (we can see writing thread in taskmanager after r prompt returns).

is there way use bigmemory ram only, each worker in foreach loop can access data via ram?

thanks help.

so, if have enough ram, use standard r matrices. pass part of each matrix each cluster, use rdsfiles.

one example computing colsums 3 cores:

# functions splitting cutbysize <- function(m, nb) {   int <- m / nb    upper <- round(1:nb * int)   lower <- c(1, upper[-nb] + 1)   size <- c(upper[1], diff(upper))    cbind(lower, upper, size) } seq2 <- function(lims) seq(lims[1], lims[2])  # matrix bm <- matrix(1, 10e3, 1e3) ncores <- 3 intervals <- cutbysize(ncol(bm), ncores) # save each part in different file tmpfile <- tempfile() (ic in seq_len(ncores)) {   saverds(bm[, seq2(intervals[ic, ])],            paste0(tmpfile, ic, ".rds")) } # parallel computation reading 1 part @ beginning cl <- parallel::makecluster(ncores) doparallel::registerdoparallel(cl) library(foreach) colsums <- foreach(ic = seq_len(ncores), .combine = 'c') %dopar% {   bm.part <- readrds(paste0(tmpfile, ic, ".rds"))   colsums(bm.part) } parallel::stopcluster(cl) # checking results all.equal(colsums, colsums(bm))

you use rm(bm); gc() after writing parts disk.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a better way to structure post methods in Class Based Views -

i'm using class based views in django , never specify url in ajax calls , omit action parameter in form because know these requests go through post method of class based view. notice view - profile page make many requests depending on user updating on page - post method become convoluted , if/else mess example: def post(self, request, *args, **kwargs): # handle user changing available date if request.post.get('availabledate') != none: self.updateavailabledate(request) return jsonresponse({'result':'success'}) if request.post.get('newprojectname') != none: creative_user = creativeuserprofile.objects.get(id = request.user.id) project = project.create_project(creative_user, request.post['newprojectname']) project.save() return jsonresponse({'projectid': project.id }) if request.post.get('projectimage') != none , request.files['file']: proj
Read more

performance - Why is XCHG reg, reg a 3 micro-op instruction on modern Intel architectures? -

i'm doing micro-optimization on performance critical part of code , came across sequence of instructions (in at&t syntax): add %rax, %rbx mov %rdx, %rax mov %rbx, %rdx i thought had use case xchg allow me shave instruction , write: add %rbx, %rax xchg %rax, %rdx however, dimay found agner fog's instruction tables , xchg 3 micro-op instruction 2 cycle latency on sandy bridge, ivy bridge, broadwell, haswell , skylake. 3 whole micro-ops , 2 cycles of latency! 3 micro-ops throws off 4-1-1-1 cadence , 2 cycle latency makes worse original in best case since last 2 instructions in original might execute in parallel. now... cpu might breaking instruction micro-ops equivalent to: mov %rax, %tmp mov %rdx, %rax mov %tmp, %rdx where tmp anonymous internal register , suppose last 2 micro-ops run in parallel latency 2 cycles. given register renaming occurs on these micro-architectures, though, doesn't make sense me done way. why wouldn't register renamer
Read more

jquery - Responsive Navbar with Sub Navbar -

good day, forgive me nav vocabulary not best. if question confusing apologize. i'm working on navigation bar needs centered on page @ 768px , above. items in nav open (or perhaps toggle) subnav lives directly below. these nav should appear centered on page. i have been able work through responsive portion of nav bar, having main items align vertically , sub nav menu of each item roll out below, , gave them indent separation. working well. however, issue not responsive side, behavior @ width greater 768px. happens toggling menu's sub navigation pushes other main items down page below sub nav. here's code: $(document).ready(function () { //stick in fixed 100% height behind navbar don't wrap $('#slide-nav.navbar-inverse').after($('<div class="inverse" id="navbar-height-col"></div>')); $('#slide-nav.navbar-default').after($('<div id="navbar-height-col"></d
Read more