Ask Your Question
1

Sage 8.1 eats memory until system freeze

asked 2018-02-07 04:16:09 -0500

Marco Caliari gravatar image

updated 2018-02-08 03:24:37 -0500

Hi, I have a quite long code (which uses arbitrary precision real numbers) which runs perfectly on Sage 7.5.1 (ppa for Mint 17.3 - Ubuntu 14.04). On Sage 8.1 (sage-8.1-Ubuntu_14.04-x86_64.tar.bz2) it starts to eat the memory until it freezes the system. I would like to help in debugging. Is there something that I can try/run/test? I can also upload the code, if necessary.

Finally, I have a minimal working code

def test(m,c,precision):
    M = 3*m
    RRR = RealField(prec = precision)
    coef02 = [RRR(1/i) for i in [1..M+1]]
    g = coef02[M]
    for i in [M-1..2,step=-1]: # Horner
        g = x*g+coef02[i]
    ME = 32
    disk = [exp (2*pi.n(precision)*I*i/ME) for i in range(ME)]
    gamma = abs(c)/2
    ellipse = [(gamma*(w+c^2/(4*gamma^2)/w)) for w in disk]
    epsilon1 = max([abs(g(x=z)) for z in ellipse])
    return
m = 40
for c in [1/2..10,step=1/2]:
    for ell in [1..10]:
        test(m,c,165)

If I run this in 7.5.1, I see (in top) the memory percentage stable around 2.5. If I run in 8.1, it grows up to 7.3 before code termination. If I increase the length of the loops, memory usage continues to grow.

edit retag flag offensive close merge delete

Comments

Use a profiler, e.g.

https://docs.python.org/2/library/profile.html

to see where the code spends the most time. (Implement somehow hard breaks to make it finish.) Then look exactly at the corresponding points. It is hard to do this without the code.

Some IDEs may have a profiler functionality, e.g.

https://www.jetbrains.com/help/pycharm/optimizing-your-code-using-profilers.html

(Never tried it with sage.)

It is also a good idea to run the code in the debugger and follow the jumps a while till the run freezes...

Note: We only know that approximate values are used. Make sure, that all sage algorithms used do not require exact algebra to terminate.

dan_fulea gravatar imagedan_fulea ( 2018-02-07 12:38:18 -0500 )edit

1 answer

Sort by ยป oldest newest most voted
0

answered 2018-02-08 06:20:00 -0500

dan_fulea gravatar image

After inserting some prints, i decided to perform exact arithmetics as long as i could.

(Expanding the "polynomial" g was showing a much simpler "polynomial". Then i made a true polynomial out of it, in order to use the relations satisfied by $\xi$, the primitive root of order $32$ with the complex embedding $\exp(2\pi i/32)$. Computations could be then instantly done w.r.t. the wanted precision.)

Slightly changed code:

PREC   = 165
coef02 = [ 1/k for k in [1..10**3] ]
RRR    = RealField(prec = PREC)
ME     = 32
m      = 40

F.<xi> = CyclotomicField(ME)

def test(m, c, precision):
    M = 3*m
    g = coef02[M]
    for k in [ M-1..2, step=-1 ]:    # Horner
        g = x*g + coef02[k]

    g = g.expand()
    g = g.polynomial(QQ)

    disk     = [ xi^k for k in range(ME) ]
    gamma    = abs(c)/2
    ellipse  = [ gamma*(1+c^2/4/gamma^2/w) for w in disk ]

    gvals    = [ g(x=z) for z in ellipse ]
    gabsvals = [ abs( a.complex_embedding( PREC ) ) for a in gvals ]

    epsilon1 = max( gabsvals )
    return epsilon1

for c in [1/2..10, step=1/2]:
    # for ell in [1..10]:
    if True:
        print "c = %4s -> %s" % ( c, test(m, c, PREC) )

Results:

c =  1/2 -> 0.5451774444795624753378569716654125445795323421817
c =    1 -> 3.877132750163312268194055765884982005629693463214
c =  3/2 -> 1.515428179650201079251313202796991675611785000224e19
c =    2 -> 5.539239522130613509638371201851936011597427063094e33
c =  5/2 -> 1.254347365744115869605098307063077516259244950897e45
c =    3 -> 2.485622007123562697065591352164619348140520368265e54
c =  7/2 -> 1.840038623607799316523292031320351173032744393937e62
c =    4 -> 1.220236022233173046095362930456016538046036458529e69
c =  9/2 -> 1.277831294399228135782148313824375408273976668569e75
c =    5 -> 3.115249330363268000457437128132669088002585033222e80
c = 11/2 -> 2.333289819982865723165430200076136015690563123553e85
c =    6 -> 6.591269725218075592564330647475925557514987984406e89
c = 13/2 -> 8.207311589847995050609430607861848821939923069317e93
c =    7 -> 5.085511066693174056991376957615614330916905538649e97
c = 15/2 -> 1.726432056041238224907347764787556059619499068072e101
c =    8 -> 3.470108034398171310085902662737894563375023273487e104
c = 17/2 -> 4.400366924707123401372401158677839663730509791993e107
c =    9 -> 3.710533637845394896264923862712625167668124571656e110
c = 19/2 -> 2.174358483775499706197907609995433166935905001082e113
c =   10 -> 9.191254911989823075908386272607123115557791656833e115

I hope this answers practically the question, although it deviates from RRR.

edit flag offensive delete link more

Comments

Thanks for the code optimization. But the problem remains: a working code in 7.5.1 makes 8.1 to use more and more memory. I think this is a regression. Shall I open a bug report?

Marco Caliari gravatar imageMarco Caliari ( 2018-02-08 06:42:16 -0500 )edit

@Marco Caliari -- did you report this on sage-support or sage-devel?

slelievre gravatar imageslelievre ( 2018-04-20 14:17:45 -0500 )edit

Your Answer

Please start posting anonymously - your entry will be published after you log in or create a new account.

Add Answer

Question Tools

1 follower

Stats

Asked: 2018-02-07 04:16:09 -0500

Seen: 91 times

Last updated: Feb 08