I have data, which is in a text file. Each line is a computation to do. This file has around 100 000 000 lines.
First I load everything into the ram, then I have a a method that performs the computation and gives the following results:
def process(data_line):
#do computation
return result
Then I call it like this with packets of 2000 lines and then save the result to disk :
POOL_SIZE = 15 #nbcore - 1
PACKET_SIZE = 2000
pool = Pool(processes=POOL_SIZE)
data_lines = util.load_data_lines(to_be_computed_filename)
number_of_packets = int(number_of_lines/ PACKET_SIZE)
for i in range(number_of_packets):
lines_packet = data_lines[:PACKET_SIZE]
data_lines = data_lines[PACKET_SIZE:]
results = pool.map(process, lines_packet)
save_computed_data_to_disk(to_be_computed_filename, results)
# process the last packet, which is smaller
results.extend(pool.map(process, data_lines))
save_computed_data_to_disk(to_be_computed_filename, results)
print("Done")
The problem is, while I was writing to disk, my CPU is computing nothing and has 8 cores. It is looking at the task manager and it seems that quite a lot of CPU time is lost.
I have to write to disk after having completed my computation because the results are 1000 times larger than the input.
Anyways, I would have to write to the disk at some point. If time is not lost here, it will be lost later.
What could I do to allow one core to write to disk, while still computing with the others? Switch to C?
At this rate I can process 100 millions lines in 75h, but I have 12 billions lines to process, so any improvement is welcome.
example of timings:
Processing packet 2/15 953 of C:/processing/drop_zone\to_be_processed_txt_files\t_to_compute_303620.txt
Launching task and waiting for it to finish...
Task completed, Continuing
Packet was processed in 11.534576654434204 seconds
We are currently going at a rate of 0.002306915330886841 sec/words
Which is 433.47928145051293 words per seconds
Saving in temporary file
Printing writing 5000 computed line to disk took 0.04400920867919922 seconds
saving word to resume from : 06 20 25 00 00
Estimated time for processing the remaining packets is : 51:19:25
Note: This SharedMemory works only for Python >= 3.8 since it first appeared there
Start 3 kinds of processes: Reader, Processor(s), Writer.
Have Reader process read the file incrementally, sharing the result via shared_memory and Queue.
Have the Processor(s) consume the Queue, consume the shared_memory, and return the result(s) via another Queue. Again, as shared_memory.
Have the Writer process consume the second Queue, writing to the destination file.
Have them all communicate through, say, some Events or DictProxy, with the MainProcess who will act as the orchestrator.
Example:
import time
import random
import hashlib
import multiprocessing as MP
from queue import Queue, Empty
# noinspection PyCompatibility
from multiprocessing.shared_memory import SharedMemory
from typing import Dict, List
def readerfunc(
shm_arr: List[SharedMemory], q_out: Queue, procr_ready: Dict[str, bool]
):
numshm = len(shm_arr)
for batch in range(1, 6):
print(f"Reading batch #{batch}")
for shm in shm_arr:
#### Simulated Reading ####
for j in range(0, shm.size):
shm.buf[j] = random.randint(0, 255)
#### ####
q_out.put((batch, shm))
# Need to sync here because we're reusing the same SharedMemory,
# so gotta wait until all processors are done before sending the
# next batch
while not q_out.empty() or not all(procr_ready.values()):
time.sleep(1.0)
def processorfunc(
q_in: Queue, q_out: Queue, suicide: type(MP.Event()), procr_ready: Dict[str, bool]
):
pname = MP.current_process().name
procr_ready[pname] = False
while True:
time.sleep(1.0)
procr_ready[pname] = True
if q_in.empty() and suicide.is_set():
break
try:
batch, shm = q_in.get_nowait()
except Empty:
continue
print(pname, "got batch", batch)
procr_ready[pname] = False
#### Simulated Processing ####
h = hashlib.blake2b(shm.buf, digest_size=4, person=b"processor")
time.sleep(random.uniform(5.0, 7.0))
#### ####
q_out.put((pname, h.hexdigest()))
def writerfunc(q_in: Queue, suicide: type(MP.Event())):
while True:
time.sleep(1.0)
if q_in.empty() and suicide.is_set():
break
try:
pname, digest = q_in.get_nowait()
except Empty:
continue
print("Writing", pname, digest)
#### Simulated Writing ####
time.sleep(random.uniform(3.0, 6.0))
#### ####
print("Writing", pname, digest, "done")
def main():
shm_arr = [
SharedMemory(create=True, size=1024)
for _ in range(0, 5)
]
q_read = MP.Queue()
q_write = MP.Queue()
procr_ready = MP.Manager().dict()
poison = MP.Event()
poison.clear()
reader = MP.Process(target=readerfunc, args=(shm_arr, q_read, procr_ready))
procrs = []
for n in range(0, 3):
p = MP.Process(
target=processorfunc, name=f"Proc{n}", args=(q_read, q_write, poison, procr_ready)
)
procrs.append(p)
writer = MP.Process(target=writerfunc, args=(q_write, poison))
reader.start()
[p.start() for p in procrs]
writer.start()
reader.join()
print("Reader has ended")
while not all(procr_ready.values()):
time.sleep(5.0)
poison.set()
[p.join() for p in procrs]
print("Processors have ended")
writer.join()
print("Writer has ended")
[shm.close() for shm in shm_arr]
[shm.unlink() for shm in shm_arr]
if __name__ == '__main__':
main()
You say you have 8 cores, yet you have:
POOL_SIZE = 15 #nbcore - 1
Assuming you want to leave one processor free (presumably for the main process?) why wouldn't this number be 7? But why do you even want to read a processor free? You are making successive calls to map. While the main process is waiting for these calls to return, it requires know CPU. This is why if you do not specify a pool size when you instantiate your pool it defaults to the number of CPUs you have and not that number minus one. I will have more to say about this below.
Since you have a very large, in-memory list, is it possible that you are expending waisted cycles in your loop rewriting this list on each iteration of the loop. Instead, you can just take a slice of the list and pass that as the iterable argument to map:
POOL_SIZE = 15 # ????
PACKET_SIZE = 2000
data_lines = util.load_data_lines(to_be_computed_filename)
number_of_packets, remainder = divmod(number_of_lines, PACKET_SIZE)
with Pool(processes=POOL_SIZE) as pool:
offset = 0
for i in range(number_of_packets):
results = pool.map(process, data_lines[offset:offset+PACKET_SIZE])
offset += PACKET_SIZE
save_computed_data_to_disk(to_be_computed_filename, results)
if remainder:
results = pool.map(process, data_lines[offset:offset+remainder])
save_computed_data_to_disk(to_be_computed_filename, results)
print("Done")
Between each call to map the main process is writing out the results to to_be_computed_filename. In the meanwhile, every process in your pool is sitting idle. This should be given to another process (actually a thread running under the main process):
import multiprocessing
import queue
import threading
POOL_SIZE = 15 # ????
PACKET_SIZE = 2000
data_lines = util.load_data_lines(to_be_computed_filename)
number_of_packets, remainder = divmod(number_of_lines, PACKET_SIZE)
def save_data(q):
while True:
results = q.get()
if results is None:
return # signal to terminate
save_computed_data_to_disk(to_be_computed_filename, results)
q = queue.Queue()
t = threading.Thread(target=save_data, args=(q,))
t.start()
with Pool(processes=POOL_SIZE) as pool:
offset = 0
for i in range(number_of_packets):
results = pool.map(process, data_lines[offset:offset+PACKET_SIZE])
offset += PACKET_SIZE
q.put(results)
if remainder:
results = pool.map(process, data_lines[offset:offset+remainder])
q.put(results)
q.put(None)
t.join() # wait for thread to terminate
print("Done")
I've chosen to run save_data in a thread of the main process. This could also be another process in which case you would need to use a multiprocessing.Queue instance. But I figured the main process thread is mostly waiting for the map to complete and there would not be competition for the GIL. Now if you do not leave a processor free for the threading job, save_data, it may end up doing most of the saving only after all of the results have been created. You would need to experiment a bit with this.
Ideally, I would also modify the reading of the input file so as to not have to first read it all into memory but rather read it line by line yielding 2000 line chunks and submitting those as jobs for map to process:
import multiprocessing
import queue
import threading
POOL_SIZE = 15 # ????
PACKET_SIZE = 2000
def save_data(q):
while True:
results = q.get()
if results is None:
return # signal to terminate
save_computed_data_to_disk(to_be_computed_filename, results)
def read_data():
"""
yield lists of PACKET_SIZE
"""
lines = []
with open(some_file, 'r') as f:
for line in iter(f.readline(), ''):
lines.append(line)
if len(lines) == PACKET_SIZE:
yield lines
lines = []
if lines:
yield lines
q = queue.Queue()
t = threading.Thread(target=save_data, args=(q,))
t.start()
with Pool(processes=POOL_SIZE) as pool:
for l in read_data():
results = pool.map(process, l)
q.put(results)
q.put(None)
t.join() # wait for thread to terminate
print("Done")
I made two assumptions: The writing is hitting the I/O bound, not the CPU bound - meaning that throwing more cores onto writing would not improve the performance. And the process function contains some heavy computations.
I would approach it differently:
Split up the large list into a list of list
Feed it than into the processes
Store the total result
Here is the example code:
import multiprocessing as mp
data_lines = [0]*10000 # read it from file
size = 2000
# Split the list into a list of list (with chunksize `size`)
work = [data_lines[i:i + size] for i in range(0, len(data_lines), size)]
def process(data):
result = len(data) # some something fancy
return result
with mp.Pool() as p:
result = p.map(process, work)
save_computed_data_to_disk(file_name, result)
On meta: You may also have a look into numpy or pandas (depending on the data) because it sounds that you would like to do something into that direction.
The first thing that comes to mind for the code is to run the saving function in the thread. By this we exclude the bottelneck of waiting disk writing. Like so:
executor = ThreadPoolExecutor(max_workers=2)
future = executor.submit(save_computed_data_to_disk, to_be_computed_filename, results)
saving_futures.append(future)
...
concurrent.futures.wait(saving_futures, return_when=ALL_COMPLETED) # wait all saved to disk after processing
print("Done")
so this seemingly simple problem is doing my head in.
I have a dataset (datas) and I do some processing on it (this isn't the issue, though this takes time owing to the size of the dataset) to produce multiple rows to be stored into a CSV file. However, it is very taxing to produce a row, then save it to csv, then produce a row and then save it etc.
So I'm trying to implement producer and consumer threads - producers will produce each row of data (to speed up the process), store in a queue and a single consumer will then append to my csv file.
My attempts below result in success sometimes (the data is correctly saved) or other times the data is "cut off" (either an entire row or part of it).
What am I doing wrong?
from threading import Thread
from queue import Queue
import csv
q = Queue()
def producer():
datas = [["hello","world"],["test","hey"],["my","away"],["your","gone"],["bye","hat"]]
for data in datas:
q.put(data)
def consumer():
while True:
local = q.get()
file = open('dataset.csv','a')
with file as fd:
writer = csv.writer(fd)
writer.writerow(local)
file.close()
q.task_done()
for i in range(10):
t = Thread(target=consumer)
t.daemon = True
t.start()
producer()
q.join()
I think this does something similar to what you're trying to do. For testing purposes, it prefixes each row of data in the CSV file produced with a "producer id" so the source of the data can be seen in the results.
As you will be able to see from the csv file produced, all the data produced gets put into it.
import csv
import random
from queue import Queue
from threading import Thread
import time
SENTINEL = object()
def producer(q, id):
data = (("hello", "world"), ("test", "hey"), ("my", "away"), ("your", "gone"),
("bye", "hat"))
for datum in data:
q.put((id,) + datum) # Prefix producer ID to datum for testing.
time.sleep(random.random()) # Vary thread speed for testing.
class Consumer(Thread):
def __init__(self, q):
super().__init__()
self.q = q
def run(self):
with open('dataset.csv', 'w', newline='') as file:
writer = csv.writer(file, delimiter=',')
while True:
datum = self.q.get()
if datum is SENTINEL:
break
writer.writerow(datum)
def main():
NUM_PRODUCERS = 10
queue = Queue()
# Create producer threads.
threads = []
for id in range(NUM_PRODUCERS):
t = Thread(target=producer, args=(queue, id+1,))
t.start()
threads.append(t)
# Create Consumer thread.
consumer = Consumer(queue)
consumer.start()
# Wait for all producer threads to finish.
while threads:
threads = [thread for thread in threads if thread.is_alive()]
queue.put(SENTINEL) # Indicate to consumer thread no more data.
consumer.join()
print('Done')
if __name__ == '__main__':
main()
I am using multiprocessing module via class Process to do some not cpu-bound tasks, e.g. I/O, or web requests. If the tasks take too long the CPU reaches 100% of usage (all threads are waiting the data to return). I suspect asynchronous execution solution but I have never done something like this. The code I am using is something like the following where I have a huge list and each process works on a chunk.
Could you please make a suggestion in this direction?
Thanks in advance!!
import multiprocessing
def getData(urlsChunk, myQueue):
for url in urlsChunk:
fp = urllib.urlopen(url)
try:
data = fp.read()
myQueue.put(data)
finally:
fp.close()
return myQueue
manager = multiprocessing.Manager()
HUGEQ = manager.Queue()
urls = ['a huge list of url items']
chunksize = int(math.ceil(len(urls) / float(nprocs)))
for i in range(nprocs):
p = Process(
target = getData, # This is my worker
args=(urls[chunksize * i:chunksize * (i + 1)],
MYQUEUE
)
)
processes.append(p)
p.start()
for p in processes:
p.join()
while True:
try:
MYQUEUEelem = MYQUEUE.get(block=False)
except Empty:
break
else:
'do something with the MYQUEUEelem'
Using multiprocessing.Pool, your code can be simplified:
import multiprocessing
def getData(url):
fp = urllib.urlopen(url)
try:
return fp.read()
finally:
fp.close()
if __name__ == '__main__': # should protect the "entry point" of the program
urls = ['a huge list of url items']
pool = multiprocessing.Pool()
for result in pool.imap(getData, urls, chunksize=10):
# do something with the result
I'm trying to speed up some data processing using the multiprocessing module, the idea being I can send a chunk of data to each process I start up to utilize all the cores on my machine instead of just one at a time.
So I built an iterator for the data using the pandas read_fwf() function, with chunksize=50000 lines at a time. My problem is that eventually the iterator should raise StopIteration, and I'm trying to catch this in an except block in the child process and pass it along to the parent thread using a Queue to let the parent know it can stop spawning child processes. I have no idea what's wrong though, but what's happening is it gets to the end of the data and then keeps spawning processes which essentially do nothing.
def MyFunction(data_iterator, results_queue, Placeholder, message_queue):
try:
current_data = data_iterator.next()
#does other stuff here
#that isn't important
placeholder_result = "Eggs and Spam"
results_queue.put(placeholder_result)
return None
except StopIteration:
message_queue.put("Out Of Data")
return None
results_queue = Queue() #for passing results from each child process
message_queue = Queue() #for passing the stop iteration message
cpu_count = cpu_count() #num of cores on the machine
Data_Remaining = True #loop control
output_values = [] #list to put results in
print_num_records = 0 #used to print how many lines have been processed
my_data_file = "some_data.dat"
data_iterator = BuildDataIterator(my_data_file)
while Data_Remaining:
processes = []
for process_num in range(cpu_count):
if __name__ == "__main__":
p = Process(target=MyFunction, args=(data_iterator,results_queue,Placeholder, message_queue))
processes.append(p)
p.start()
print "Process " + str(process_num) + " Started" #print some stuff to
print_num_records = print_num_records + 50000 #show how far along
print "Processing records through: ", print_num_records #my data file I am
for i,p in enumerate(processes):
print "Joining Process " + str(i)
output_values.append(results_queue.get())
p.join(None)
if not message_queue.empty():
message = message_queue.get()
else:
message = ""
if message == "Out Of Data":
Data_Remaining = False
print "STOP ITERATION NOW PLEASE"
Update:
I discovered a problem with the data iterator. There are approximately 8 million rows in my data set, and after it processes the 8 million it never actually returns a StopIteration, it keeps returning the same 14 rows of data over and over. Here is the code that builds my data iterator:
def BuildDataIterator(my_data_file):
#data_columns is a list of 2-tuples
#headers is a list of strings
#num_lines is 50000
data_reader = read_fwf(my_data_file, colspecs=data_columns, header=None, names=headers, chunksize=num_lines)
data_iterator = data_reader.__iter__()
return data_iterator
I have a very weird problem with the code below. when numrows = 10 the Process loops completes itself and proceeds to finish. If the growing list becomes larger it goes into a deadlock. Why is this and how can I solve this?
import multiprocessing, time, sys
# ----------------- Calculation Engine -------------------
def feed(queue, parlist):
for par in parlist:
queue.put(par)
def calc(queueIn, queueOut):
while True:
try:
par = queueIn.get(block = False)
print "Project ID: %s started. " % par
res = doCalculation(par)
queueOut.put(res)
except:
break
def write(queue, fname):
print 'Started to write to file'
fhandle = open(fname, "w")
while True:
try:
res = queue.get(block = False)
for m in res:
print >>fhandle, m
except:
break
fhandle.close()
print 'Complete writing to the file'
def doCalculation(project_ID):
numrows = 100
toFileRowList = []
for i in range(numrows):
toFileRowList.append([project_ID]*100)
print "%s %s" % (multiprocessing.current_process().name, i)
return toFileRowList
def main():
parlist = [276, 266]
nthreads = multiprocessing.cpu_count()
workerQueue = multiprocessing.Queue()
writerQueue = multiprocessing.Queue()
feedProc = multiprocessing.Process(target = feed , args = (workerQueue, parlist))
calcProc = [multiprocessing.Process(target = calc , args = (workerQueue, writerQueue)) for i in range(nthreads)]
writProc = multiprocessing.Process(target = write, args = (writerQueue, 'somefile.csv'))
feedProc.start()
feedProc.join ()
for p in calcProc:
p.start()
for p in calcProc:
p.join()
writProc.start()
writProc.join()
if __name__=='__main__':
sys.exit(main())
I think the problem is the Queue buffer getting filled, so you need to read from the queue before you can put additional stuff in it.
For example, in your feed thread you have:
queue.put(par)
If you keep putting much stuff without reading this will cause it to block untill the buffer is freed, but the problem is that you only free the buffer in your calc thread, which in turn doesn't get started before you join your blocking feed thread.
So, in order for your feed thread to finish, the buffer should be freed, but the buffer won't be freed before the thread finishes :)
Try organizing your queues access more.
The feedProc and the writeProc are not actually running in parallel with the rest of your program. When you have
proc.start()
proc.join ()
you start the process and then, on the join() you immediatly wait for it to finish. In this case there's no gain in multiprocessing, only overhead. Try to start ALL processes at once before you join them. This will also have the effect that your queues get emptied regularyl and you won't deadlock.