[Numpy-discussion] profiling line by line
Wed Sep 17 18:29:09 CDT 2008
On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 18:09, Ondrej Certik <email@example.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 3:56 AM, Robert Kern <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 15, 2008 at 11:13, Arnar Flatberg <email@example.com> wrote:
>>> That would make me an extremely happy user, I've been looking for this for
>>> I can't imagine I'm the only one who profiles some hundred lines of code and
>>> ends up with 90% of total time in the dot-function
>> For the time being, you can grab it here:
>> It requires Cython and a C compiler to build. I'm still debating
>> myself about the desired workflow for using it, but for now, it only
>> profiles functions which you have registered with it. I have made the
>> profiler work as a decorator to make this easy. E.g.,
>> from line_profiler import LineProfiler
>> profile = LineProfiler()
>> def my_slow_func():
>> This is kind of inconvenient, so I have a little script that handles
>> everything except for the @profile itself. It started as a script to
>> run cProfile nicely, so it actually does that by default.
>> I took pystone.py from the Python source and added a couple of
>> @profile decorators to demonstrate:
>> [line_profiler]$ ./kernprof.py --help
>> Usage: ./kernprof.py [-s setupfile] [-o output_file_path] scriptfile [arg] ...
>> -h, --help show this help message and exit
>> -l, --line-by-line Use the line-by-line profiler from the line_profiler
>> module instead of cProfile. Implies --builtin.
>> -b, --builtin Put 'profile' in the builtins. Use 'profile.enable()'
>> and 'profile.disable()' in your code to turn it on and
>> off, or '@profile' to decorate a single function, or
>> 'with profile:' to profile a single section of code.
>> -o OUTFILE, --outfile=OUTFILE
>> Save stats to <outfile>
>> -s SETUP, --setup=SETUP
>> Code to execute before the code to profile
>> [line_profiler]$ ./kernprof.py -l pystone.py
>> Pystone(1.1) time for 50000 passes = 11.34
>> This machine benchmarks at 4409.17 pystones/second
>> Wrote profile results to pystone.py.lprof
>> [line_profiler]$ ./view_line_prof.py pystone.py.lprof
>> Timer unit: 1e-06 s
>> File: pystone.py
>> Function: Proc0 at line 79
>> Total time: 8.46516 s
> This is what I am getting:
> $ ./kernprof.py -l pystone.py
> Wrote profile results to pystone.py.lprof
> $ ./view_line_prof.py pystone.py.lprof
> Timer unit: 1e-06 s
> So I think you meant:
> $ ./kernprof.py -l mystone.py
> Wrote profile results to mystone.py.lprof
> $ ./view_line_prof.py mystone.py.lprof
> Timer unit: 1e-06 s
> File: pystone.py
> Function: Proc0 at line 79
> Total time: 13.0803 s
> Now it works.
No, I meant pystone.py. My script-finding code may have (incorrectly)
found a different, uninstrumented pystone.py file somewhere else,
though. Try with "./pystone.py".
> This is an excellent piece of software! Nice job. Just today I needed
> such a thing!
> How do you easily install it?
"python setup.py install" should have installed the module. I haven't
done anything with the scripts, yet.
> I usually do "python setup.py install
> --home=~/lib" and I have the PYTHONPATH + PATH setup in my .bashrc,
> but I then need to manually remove the stuff from my ~/lib if I want
> to uninstall, which sucks. So this time I just did "python setup.py
> build" and moved the .so file manually to the current dir. But there
> must be a better way. What is your workflow?
For things I am developing on, I build them in-place, using the
setuptools "develop" command to add the appropriate path to the
easy-install.pth file. To remove, I would just edit that file.
For thing I'm not developing on, I usually build and install an egg if
at all possible.
But then, I'm typically on a single-user box where I'm root, so I
sometimes do nasty and unsanitary things like chown -R rkern:rkern
> Anyway, so I used it on my code and here is what I got:
> File: hermes1d/mesh.py
> Function: integrate_function at line 119
> Total time: 0.647412 s
> Line # Hits Time % Time Line Contents
> 119 @profile
> 120 def integrate_function(self, f):
> 121 """
> 122 Integrate the function
> "f" on the element.
> 123 """
> 124 96 1091 0.2 from numpy import array
> 125 96 461070 71.2 from scipy.integrate
> import quadrature
> 126 96 496 0.1 a, b =
> self.nodes.x, self.nodes.x
> 127 96 418 0.1 def func(x):
> 128 #print x
> 129 #print
> array([f.f(y) for y in x])
> 130 return
> array([f.f(y) for y in x])
> 131 96 183903 28.4 val, err =
> quadrature(func, a, b)
> 132 #print val, a, b
> 133 #stop
> 134 96 434 0.1 return val
> This is interesting, because 70% of time is spent on "from
> scipy.integrate import quadrature". So this is not good.
> So I moved it out and voila! My code is 3.4x faster. I really didn't
> know that importing (scipy.integrate) is *so* slow.
It should only be slow the first time. If it's not, then there's a
problem somewhere (and I wouldn't put it past being in the profiler;
it might screw up something in the import mechanism). Can you do the
import both outside the function *and* inside to see if that changes
"I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless
enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as
though it had an underlying truth."
-- Umberto Eco
More information about the Numpy-discussion