Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

How to handle long compile times? #153

Open
DrChainsaw opened this issue Aug 2, 2023 · 4 comments
Open

How to handle long compile times? #153

DrChainsaw opened this issue Aug 2, 2023 · 4 comments

Comments

@DrChainsaw
Copy link

DrChainsaw commented Aug 2, 2023

Is there some known remedy for explosive compile times when updating deeply nested models?

julia> versioninfo()
Julia Version 1.9.2
Commit e4ee485e90 (2023-07-05 09:39 UTC)
Platform Info:
  OS: Windows (x86_64-w64-mingw32)
  CPU: 8 × 11th Gen Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-1145G7 @ 2.60GHz
  WORD_SIZE: 64
  LIBM: libopenlibm
  LLVM: libLLVM-14.0.6 (ORCJIT, tigerlake)
  Threads: 1 on 8 virtual cores

(@v1.9) pkg> activate --temp

(jl_pfjmCB) pkg> add Flux, Optimisers

using Flux, Optimisers

for i in 1:2:20
    ts = @timed c = foldl((m,_) -> Parallel(+, Chain(m, Dense(1=>1)), m),1:i; init=Dense(1=>1))
    @info "$i Create chain: $(ts.time)"
    ts = @timed os = Optimisers.setup(Optimisers.Adam(0.1f0), c)
    @info " Setup opt: $(ts.time)"
    ts = @timed gs = gradient((f, x) -> sum(f(x)), c, ones(Float32, 1,1))
    @info " Calc grad: $(ts.time)"
    ts = @timed Optimisers.update(os, c, gs[1])
    @info " Update pars: $(ts.time)"
end
[ Info: 1 Create chain: 0.3122138
[ Info:  Setup opt: 0.4341211
[ Info:  Calc grad: 8.0373625
[ Info:  Update pars: 2.2199014
[ Info: 3 Create chain: 0.1156983
[ Info:  Setup opt: 0.2145368
[ Info:  Calc grad: 5.0142625
[ Info:  Update pars: 1.6858239
[ Info: 5 Create chain: 0.1646994
[ Info:  Setup opt: 0.3382421
[ Info:  Calc grad: 22.8807554
[ Info:  Update pars: 14.1957323
[ Info: 7 Create chain: 0.8384293
[ Info:  Setup opt: 1.7405321
[ Info:  Calc grad: 33.0993626
[ Info:  Update pars: 1518.808826
[ Info: 9 Create chain: 4.0898057
[ Info:  Setup opt: 8.6561113
[ Info:  Calc grad: 121.4887817
## This one is still not finished 19 hours later :/

I did this to prevent spurious stalls with NaiveGAflux, but maybe there is a better way.

@mcabbott
Copy link
Member

mcabbott commented Aug 2, 2023

One thing we could try is adding @nospecialize to some update! methods? Or even to a whole block of its code.

@DrChainsaw
Copy link
Author

Yeah, I guess that is the simplest option. Won't it hurt the SciML μs-hunting cases?

@CarloLucibello
Copy link
Member

maybe @ChrisRackauckas has some advice here

@ChrisRackauckas
Copy link
Member

Make a flamegraph of the compile times on a standard case to see what actually matters. See for example SciML/DifferentialEquations.jl#786 (comment) . That will tell you what is taking all of the compile time and should be focused on.

Removing specialization doesn't necessarily make compilation faster. Sometimes, the fact that it can remove inference at a level can actually make it worse, so check and see if it's inference time or llvm time.

Won't it hurt the SciML μs-hunting cases?

That's fine. If we need something separate we can do SimpleOptimization.jl. We already have SimpleDiffEq.jl and SimpleNonlienarSolve.jl which are specailized implementation for things like GPU kernels and ultra-small problems on the same interface. If we need a SimpleOptimization.jl for a SimpleGradientDecent and SimpleAdam then I wouldn't be too surprised. So if you go and make Optimisers the best thing for neural networks we won't mind and we can just make sure Optimization.jl has multiple options with the right trade-offs.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants