Logo Questions Linux Laravel Mysql Ubuntu Git Menu
 

Storing Python objects in a Python list vs. a fixed-length Numpy array

In doing some bioinformatics work, I've been pondering the ramifications of storing object instances in a Numpy array rather than a Python list, but in all the testing I've done the performance was worse in every instance. I am using CPython. Does anyone know the reason why?

Specifically:

  • What are the performance impacts of using a fixed-length array numpy.ndarray(dtype=object) vs. a regular Python list? Initial tests I performed showed that accessing the Numpy array elements was slower than iteration through the Python list, especially when using object methods.
  • Why is it faster to instantiate objects using a list comprehension such as [ X() for i in range(n) ] instead of a numpy.empty(size=n, dtype=object)?
  • What is the memory overhead of each? I was not able to test this. My classes extensively use __slots__, if that has any impact.
like image 397
dpyro Avatar asked Jun 27 '12 18:06

dpyro


People also ask

Which is more efficient a Python list or a NumPy array?

As predicted, we can see that NumPy arrays are significantly faster than lists.

Which is better NumPy array or list?

The answer is performance. Numpy data structures perform better in: Size - Numpy data structures take up less space. Performance - they have a need for speed and are faster than lists.

What is the advantage of NumPy array over Python list?

1. NumPy uses much less memory to store data. The NumPy arrays takes significantly less amount of memory as compared to python lists. It also provides a mechanism of specifying the data types of the contents, which allows further optimisation of the code.

Are NumPy arrays more efficient than lists?

Because the Numpy array is densely packed in memory due to its homogeneous type, it also frees the memory faster. So overall a task executed in Numpy is around 5 to 100 times faster than the standard python list, which is a significant leap in terms of speed.


1 Answers

Don't use object arrays in numpy for things like this.

They defeat the basic purpose of a numpy array, and while they're useful in a tiny handful of situations, they're almost always a poor choice.

Yes, accessing an individual element of a numpy array in python or iterating through a numpy array in python is slower than the equivalent operation with a list. (Which is why you should never do something like y = [item * 2 for item in x] when x is a numpy array.)

Numpy object arrays will have a slightly lower memory overhead than a list, but if you're storing that many individual python objects, you're going to run into other memory problems first.

Numpy is first and foremost a memory-efficient, multidimensional array container for uniform numerical data. If you want to hold arbitrary objects in a numpy array, you probably want a list, instead.


My point is that if you want to use numpy effectively, you may need to re-think how you're structuring things.

Instead of storing each object instance in a numpy array, store your numerical data in a numpy array, and if you need separate objects for each row/column/whatever, store an index into that array in each instance.

This way you can operate on the numerical arrays quickly (i.e. using numpy instead of list comprehensions).

As a quick example of what I'm talking about, here's a trivial example without using numpy:

from random import random

class PointSet(object):
    def __init__(self, numpoints):
        self.points = [Point(random(), random()) for _ in xrange(numpoints)]

    def update(self):
        for point in self.points:
            point.x += random() - 0.5
            point.y += random() - 0.5

class Point(object):
    def __init__(self, x, y):
        self.x = x
        self.y = y

points = PointSet(100000)
point = points.points[10]

for _ in xrange(1000):
    points.update()
    print 'Position of one point out of 100000:', point.x, point.y

And a similar example using numpy arrays:

import numpy as np

class PointSet(object):
    def __init__(self, numpoints):
        self.coords = np.random.random((numpoints, 2))
        self.points = [Point(i, self.coords) for i in xrange(numpoints)]

    def update(self):
        """Update along a random walk."""
        # The "+=" is crucial here... We have to update "coords" in-place, in
        # this case. 
        self.coords += np.random.random(self.coords.shape) - 0.5

class Point(object):
    def __init__(self, i, coords):
        self.i = i
        self.coords = coords

    @property
    def x(self):
        return self.coords[self.i,0]

    @property
    def y(self):
        return self.coords[self.i,1]


points = PointSet(100000)
point = points.points[10]

for _ in xrange(1000):
    points.update()
    print 'Position of one point out of 100000:', point.x, point.y

There are other ways to do this (you may want to avoid storing a reference to a specific numpy array in each point, for example), but I hope it's a useful example.

Note the difference in speed at which they run. On my machine, it's a difference of 5 seconds for the numpy version vs 60 seconds for the pure-python version.

like image 131
Joe Kington Avatar answered Sep 16 '22 12:09

Joe Kington