I have implemented an algorithm to calculate the longest contiguous common subsequence (not to be confused with longest common subsequence, though not important for this questions). I need to squeeze maximum performance from this because I'll be calling it a lot. I have implemented the same algorithm in Clojure and Java in order to compare performance. The Java version runs significantly faster. My question is whether there is anything I can do to the Clojure version to speed it up to the level of Java.
Here's the Java code:
public static int lcs(String[] a1, String[] a2) {
if (a1 == null || a2 == null) {
return 0;
}
int matchLen = 0;
int maxLen = 0;
int a1Len = a1.length;
int a2Len = a2.length;
int[] prev = new int[a2Len + 1]; // holds data from previous iteration of inner for loop
int[] curr = new int[a2Len + 1]; // used for the 'current' iteration of inner for loop
for (int i = 0; i < a1Len; ++i) {
for (int j = 0; j < a2Len; ++j) {
if (a1[i].equals(a2[j])) {
matchLen = prev[j] + 1; // curr and prev are padded by 1 to allow for this assignment when j=0
}
else {
matchLen = 0;
}
curr[j+1] = matchLen;
if (matchLen > maxLen) {
maxLen = matchLen;
}
}
int[] swap = prev;
prev = curr;
curr = swap;
}
return maxLen;
}
Here is the Clojure version of the same:
(defn lcs
[#^"[Ljava.lang.String;" a1 #^"[Ljava.lang.String;" a2]
(let [a1-len (alength a1)
a2-len (alength a2)
prev (int-array (inc a2-len))
curr (int-array (inc a2-len))]
(loop [i 0 max-len 0 prev prev curr curr]
(if (< i a1-len)
(recur (inc i)
(loop [j 0 max-len max-len]
(if (< j a2-len)
(if (= (aget a1 i) (aget a2 j))
(let [match-len (inc (aget prev j))]
(do
(aset-int curr (inc j) match-len)
(recur (inc j) (max max-len match-len))))
(do
(aset-int curr (inc j) 0)
(recur (inc j) max-len)))
max-len))
curr
prev)
max-len))))
Now let's test these on my machine:
(def pool "ABC")
(defn get-random-id [n] (apply str (repeatedly n #(rand-nth pool))))
(def a1 (into-array (take 10000 (repeatedly #(get-random-id 5)))))
(def a2 (into-array (take 10000 (repeatedly #(get-random-id 5)))))
Java:
(time (Ratcliff/lcs a1 a2))
"Elapsed time: 1521.455 msecs"
Clojure:
(time (lcs a1 a2))
"Elapsed time: 19863.633 msecs"
Clojure is quick but still an order of magnitude slower than Java. Is there anything I can do to close this gap? Or have I maxed it out and one order of magnitude is the "minimal Clojure overhead."
As you can see I am already using the "low level" construct of loop, I am using native Java arrays and I have type-hinted the parameters to avoid reflection.
There some algorithm optimizations possible, but I don't want to go there right now. I am curious how close to Java performance I can get. If I can't close the gap I'll just go with the Java code. The rest of this project is in Clojure, but perhaps sometimes dropping down to Java for performance is necessary.
EDIT: Added a faster uglier version below the first one.
Here is my take:
(defn my-lcs [^objects a1 ^objects a2]
(first
(let [n (inc (alength a1))]
(areduce a1 i
[max-len ^ints prev ^ints curr] [0 (int-array n) (int-array n)]
[(areduce a2 j max-len (unchecked-long max-len)
(let [match-len
(if (.equals (aget a1 i) (aget a2 j))
(unchecked-inc (aget prev j))
0)]
(aset curr (unchecked-inc j) match-len)
(if (> match-len max-len)
match-len
max-len)))
curr prev]))))
Main differences with yours: a[gs]et
vs a[gs]et-int
, use of unchecked-
ops (implicitly through areduce
), use of a vector as the return value (and "swap" mechanism) and max-len is coerced to primitive before the inner loop (primitive-valued loops are problematic, slightly less since 1.5RC2 but the support isn't perfect yet, however *warn-on-reflection*
is not silent).
And I switched to .equals
instead of =
to avoid the logic in Clojure's equiv.
EDIT: let's get ugly and restore the arrays swap trick:
(deftype F [^:unsynchronized-mutable ^ints curr
^:unsynchronized-mutable ^ints prev]
clojure.lang.IFn
(invoke [_ a1 a2]
(let [^objects a1 a1
^objects a2 a2]
(areduce a1 i max-len 0
(let [m (areduce a2 j max-len (unchecked-long max-len)
(let [match-len
(if (.equals (aget a1 i) (aget a2 j))
(unchecked-inc (aget prev j))
0)]
(aset curr (unchecked-inc j) (unchecked-int match-len))
(if (> match-len max-len)
match-len
max-len)))
bak curr]
(set! curr prev)
(set! prev bak)
m)))))
(defn my-lcs2 [^objects a1 a2]
(let [n (inc (alength a1))
f (F. (int-array n) (int-array n))]
(f a1 a2)))
On my box, it's 30% faster.
Here are a couple improvements:
Beyond that (and the long type hint on the recur mentioned above), I don't see any obvious ways to improve further.
(defn lcs
[^objects a1 ^objects a2]
(let [a1-len (alength a1)
a2-len (alength a2)
prev (int-array (inc a2-len))
curr (int-array (inc a2-len))]
(loop [i 0 max-len 0 prev prev curr curr]
(if (< i a1-len)
(recur (inc i)
(long (loop [j 0 max-len max-len]
(if (< j a2-len)
(if (= (aget a1 i) (aget a2 j))
(let [match-len (inc (aget prev j))]
(do
(aset curr (inc j) match-len)
(recur (inc j) (max max-len match-len))))
(do
(aset curr (inc j) 0)
(recur (inc j) max-len)))
max-len)))
curr
prev)
max-len))))
#'user/lcs
user> (time (lcs a1 a2))
"Elapsed time: 3862.211 msecs"
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With