Skip to main content

evaluation - Contexts and parallelization


This question is related to my previous one here. I opened a new question because I think that the root cause is different though. BTW I use MMA 9 on a mac OS X 10.11 (El Capitan).


I put here a minimal example. I define a constant:



const`precisionRate = 10

and a function which uses this constant:


f = Function[x, N[x^2, const`precisionRate]];

when I look at the definition of my function I get as expected:


def


If I run it I get as expected:


f[2]
(*4.000000000*)


Using it within table also works:


Table[{y, f[y]}, {y, -1, 1, 0.1}]
(*{{-1., 1.}, {-0.9, 0.81}, {-0.8, 0.64}, {-0.7, 0.49}, {-0.6, 
0.36}, {-0.5, 0.25}, {-0.4, 0.16}, {-0.3, 0.09}, {-0.2, 
0.04}, {-0.1, 0.01}, {0., 0.}, {0.1, 0.01}, {0.2, 0.04}, {0.3, 
0.09}, {0.4, 0.16}, {0.5, 0.25}, {0.6, 0.36}, {0.7, 0.49}, {0.8, 
0.64}, {0.9, 0.81}, {1., 1.}}*)

But when I run:



ParallelTable[{y, f[y]}, {y, -1, 1, 0.1}]

I get an error (from each kernel separately of course):


enter image description here


Why does prallelization screw this up?



Answer



I am not 100% comfortable about this aspect of parallelization, so this is not going to be a full answer, but here are some hints:


In order for a piece of code to run in parallel, all definitions it uses must be copied to the subkernels. This is called "distributing" the definitions and can be done manually by DistributeDefinitions. It is also done automatically by most parallel functions (such as ParallelTable). A notable exception was ParallelEvaluate until version 10.4 .


Automatic distribution is done only for $Context. This is controlled by $DistributedContexts.


Why not distribute definitions for all contexts? Because for a package to work properly, it may not be sufficient to just copy all definitions from its context. The package may do things upon loading which are more complex than issuing definitions. E.g. it may load LibraryFunctions. Thus packages are meant to be loaded on parallel kernels using ParallelNeeds instead of just copying their definitions over from the main kernel.



What can you do then?


Either


DistributeDefinitions[const`precisionRate]

to manually distribute the definitions of this one symbol, or


$DistributedContexts := {$Context, "const`"}

to automatically distribute everything from the const` context. The second solution looks cleaner to me.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

functions - Get leading series expansion term?

Given a function f[x] , I would like to have a function leadingSeries that returns just the leading term in the series around x=0 . For example: leadingSeries[(1/x + 2)/(4 + 1/x^2 + x)] x and leadingSeries[(1/x + 2 + (1 - 1/x^3)/4)/(4 + x)] -(1/(16 x^3)) Is there such a function in Mathematica? Or maybe one can implement it efficiently? EDIT I finally went with the following implementation, based on Carl Woll 's answer: lds[ex_,x_]:=( (ex/.x->(x+O[x]^2))/.SeriesData[U_,Z_,L_List,Mi_,Ma_,De_]:>SeriesData[U,Z,{L[[1]]},Mi,Mi+1,De]//Quiet//Normal) The advantage is, that this one also properly works with functions whose leading term is a constant: lds[Exp[x],x] 1 Answer Update 1 Updated to eliminate SeriesData and to not return additional terms Perhaps you could use: leadingSeries[expr_, x_] := Normal[expr /. x->(x+O[x]^2) /. a_List :> Take[a, 1]] Then for your examples: leadingSeries[(1/x + 2)/(4 + 1/x^2 + x), x] leadingSeries[Exp[x], x] leadingSeries[(1/x + 2 + (1 - 1/x...
Post a Comment
Read more

mathematical optimization - Minimizing using indices, error: Part::pkspec1: The expression cannot be used as a part specification

I want to use Minimize where the variables to minimize are indices pointing into an array. Here a MWE that hopefully shows what my problem is. vars = u@# & /@ Range[3]; cons = Flatten@ { Table[(u[j] != #) & /@ vars[[j + 1 ;; -1]], {j, 1, 3 - 1}], 1 vec1 = {1, 2, 3}; vec2 = {1, 2, 3}; Minimize[{Total@((vec1[[#]] - vec2[[u[#]]])^2 & /@ Range[1, 3]), cons}, vars, Integers] The error I get: Part::pkspec1: The expression u[1] cannot be used as a part specification. >> Answer Ok, it seems that one can get around Mathematica trying to evaluate vec2[[u[1]]] too early by using the function Indexed[vec2,u[1]] . The working MWE would then look like the following: vars = u@# & /@ Range[3]; cons = Flatten@{ Table[(u[j] != #) & /@ vars[[j + 1 ;; -1]], {j, 1, 3 - 1}], 1 vec1 = {1, 2, 3}; vec2 = {1, 2, 3}; NMinimize[ {Total@((vec1[[#]] - Indexed[vec2, u[#]])^2 & /@ R...
Post a Comment
Read more

plotting - Plot 4D data with color as 4th dimension

I have a list of 4D data (x position, y position, amplitude, wavelength). I want to plot x, y, and amplitude on a 3D plot and have the color of the points correspond to the wavelength. I have seen many examples using functions to define color but my wavelength cannot be expressed by an analytic function. Is there a simple way to do this? Answer Here a another possible way to visualize 4D data: data = Flatten[Table[{x, y, x^2 + y^2, Sin[x - y]}, {x, -Pi, Pi,Pi/10}, {y,-Pi,Pi, Pi/10}], 1]; You can use the function Point along with VertexColors . Now the points are places using the first three elements and the color is determined by the fourth. In this case I used Hue, but you can use whatever you prefer. Graphics3D[ Point[data[[All, 1 ;; 3]], VertexColors -> Hue /@ data[[All, 4]]], Axes -> True, BoxRatios -> {1, 1, 1/GoldenRatio}]
Post a Comment
Read more