[Numpy-discussion] numarray.linear_algebra is slow (and a partial fix?)

Tim Hochberg tim.hochberg at cox.net
Wed Feb 11 15:26:01 CST 2004


An update:

A little more tuning resulted in determinant and inverse being about 80x 
faster than the original numarray code and about 5 times faster than 
using NumPy for the same test cases I was using before (1000x4x4 
matrices). If anyone is interested, let me know and I'll send you the code.

-tim

Tim Hochberg wrote:

>
> I discovered that some (all?) of the functions in 
> numarray.linear_algebra are very slow when operating on small 
> matrices. In particular, determinant and inverse are both more than 15 
> times slower than their NumPy counterparts when operating on 4x4 
> matrices. I assume that this is simply a result of numarray's higher 
> overhead.
>
> Normally the overhead of numarray is not much of a problem since when 
> I'm operating on lots of small data chunks I can usually agregate them 
> into larger chunks and operate on the big chunks. This is, of course, 
> the standard way to get decent performance in either numarray or 
> NumPy. However, because the functions in linear_algebra take only 
> rank-2 (or 1 in some cases) arrays, their is no way to aggregate the 
> small operations and thus things run quite slow.
>
> In order to address this I rewrote some of the functions in 
> linear_algebra to allow an additional, optional, dimension on the 
> input arrays. Rank-3 arrays are treated as being a set of matrices 
> that are indexed along the first axis of A. Thus determinant(A) is 
> essentially equivalent to array(map(determinant, A)) when A is rank-3. 
> See the attached file for more detail.
>
> By this trick and by some relentless tuning, I got the numarray 
> functions to run at about the same speed as their NumPy counterparts 
> when computing the determinants and inverses of 1000 4x4 matrices. 
> That's a humungous speedup.
>
> Is this approach worth pursuing for linear_algebra in general? I'll be 
> using these myself since I need the speed, although I may back out 
> some of the more aggresive  tuning so I don't get bit if numarray's 
> internals change. I'll gladly donate this code to numarray if it's 
> wanted, and I'm willing to help convert the rest, although it probaly 
> wouldn't happen as fast as this stuff since I don't need it myself 
> presently.
>
> -tim
>
> [Use this with caution at this point -- I just got finished with a 
> tuning spree and there may well be some bugs]
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>






More information about the Numpy-discussion mailing list