Skip to main content

Export[] performance


Consider this sequence of commands:


foo10 = RandomReal[{0, 1}, {5000, 10}];
Export["D:\\Dropper\\Dropbox\\footest.csv", foo10] // AbsoluteTiming
{0.898086, "D:\\Dropper\\Dropbox\\footest.csv"}

foo100 = RandomReal[{0, 1}, {5000, 100}];
Export["D:\\Dropper\\Dropbox\\footest.csv", foo100] // AbsoluteTiming

{7.428425, "D:\\Dropper\\Dropbox\\footest.csv"}

foo1000 = RandomReal[{0, 1}, {5000, 1000}];
Export["D:\\Dropper\\Dropbox\\footest.csv", foo1000] // AbsoluteTiming
{65.063763, "D:\\Dropper\\Dropbox\\footest.csv"}

Two (at least) things leap to mind:


The first is that the performance is truly atrocious (this is on a very fast machine, on a local file system.


The second is that the times grow sublinearly in the size of the input, which indicates a whole'nother kind of weirdness.


Does anyone understand what is going on, and if there is a reasonable workaround?



EDIT Following up on @belisarius' suggestion, here are the Timing[] results for the three commands:


0.671875 4.65250 47.968750


From which we see that both the OS interaction and the internal computation are ridiculously slow. But it gets worse. In the middle of doing this experiment, when I was running the commands exactly as above with AbsoluteTiming[] replaced by Timing[], between the first and the second command Mathematica informed me that it could not do the Export[] because the "footest.csv" file was already open (which means that it did not do the necessary fclose(), or whatever Windows calls it, of course changing the file name fixed it.


For posterity, this is Mathematica 10.0.1 on Windows 8.1


ANOTHER EDIT Just for completeness: I tried the same experiment with ".dat" instead of ".csv", and the results were essentially identical (including the fclose() bug). Which makes it surprising (though gratifying) that there is an actual format that works quickly, as pointed out by @Jens.



Answer



The speed issue is similar on Mac OS X. I can only speculate what's going on, so I better not even start.


But let me suggest a work-around. Since CSV is not in any way optimized for exporting numerical data, I would instead suggest to use a different format that has similar flexibility but is particularly designed for numerical data.


Of course, this is a workaround only if your intention is to save numerical data for later use by an application that's also able to read the alternate format. Here is what I tried, and it's very fast by comparison:


foo1000 = RandomReal[{0, 1}, {5000, 1000}];


Export["footest.h5", foo1000] // AbsoluteTiming

(* ==> {0.521861, "footest.h5"} *)

foo = Import["footest.h5", "Data"]; // AbsoluteTiming

(* ==> {0.145216, Null} *)

foo[[1]] == foo1000


(* ==> True *)

The format I used is HDF5.


If you're able to work with packed arrays, then things get even faster:


foo1000 = 
  Developer`ToPackedArray@RandomReal[{0, 1}, {5000, 1000}];

Export["footest.h5", foo1000] // AbsoluteTiming


(* ==> {0.358825, "footest.h5"} *)

foo = Import["footest.h5", "Data"]; // AbsoluteTiming

(* ==> {0.084686, Null} *)

foo[[1]] == foo1000

(* ==> True *)

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

plotting - Filling between two spheres in SphericalPlot3D

Manipulate[ SphericalPlot3D[{1, 2 - n}, {θ, 0, Pi}, {ϕ, 0, 1.5 Pi}, Mesh -> None, PlotPoints -> 15, PlotRange -> {-2.2, 2.2}], {n, 0, 1}] I cant' seem to be able to make a filling between two spheres. I've already tried the obvious Filling -> {1 -> {2}} but Mathematica doesn't seem to like that option. Is there any easy way around this or ... Answer There is no built-in filling in SphericalPlot3D . One option is to use ParametricPlot3D to draw the surfaces between the two shells: Manipulate[ Show[SphericalPlot3D[{1, 2 - n}, {θ, 0, Pi}, {ϕ, 0, 1.5 Pi}, PlotPoints -> 15, PlotRange -> {-2.2, 2.2}], ParametricPlot3D[{ r {Sin[t] Cos[1.5 Pi], Sin[t] Sin[1.5 Pi], Cos[t]}, r {Sin[t] Cos[0 Pi], Sin[t] Sin[0 Pi], Cos[t]}}, {r, 1, 2 - n}, {t, 0, Pi}, PlotStyle -> Yellow, Mesh -> {2, 15}]], {n, 0, 1}]
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

plotting - Adding a thick curve to a regionplot

Suppose we have the following simple RegionPlot: f[x_] := 1 - x^2 g[x_] := 1 - 0.5 x^2 RegionPlot[{y < f[x], f[x] < y < g[x], y > g[x]}, {x, 0, 2}, {y, 0, 2}] Now I'm trying to change the curve defined by $y=g[x]$ into a thick black curve, while leaving all other boundaries in the plot unchanged. I've tried adding the region $y=g[x]$ and playing with the plotstyle, which didn't work, and I've tried BoundaryStyle, which changed all the boundaries in the plot. Now I'm kinda out of ideas... Any help would be appreciated! Answer With f[x_] := 1 - x^2 g[x_] := 1 - 0.5 x^2 You can use Epilog to add the thick line: RegionPlot[{y < f[x], f[x] < y < g[x], y > g[x]}, {x, 0, 2}, {y, 0, 2}, PlotPoints -> 50, Epilog -> (Plot[g[x], {x, 0, 2}, PlotStyle -> {Black, Thick}][[1]]), PlotStyle -> {Directive[Yellow, Opacity[0.4]], Directive[Pink, Opacity[0.4]],
Post a Comment
Read more