Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Memory requirement spike for gandlf_preprocess #780

Open
sarthakpati opened this issue Jan 22, 2024 · 4 comments
Open

Memory requirement spike for gandlf_preprocess #780

sarthakpati opened this issue Jan 22, 2024 · 4 comments
Labels
bug Something isn't working

Comments

@sarthakpati
Copy link
Collaborator

sarthakpati commented Jan 22, 2024

Describe the bug
When gandlf_process is run (with normalize and crop_external_zero_plane as preprocessing parameters), the process runs fine for a validation csv with ~180 subjects, but fails with OOM error for training csv with ~800 subjects using the BraTS data.

To Reproduce

  1. Construct a CSV of ~180 BraTS subjects, and another with ~720 subjects (copy-pasting the same 180 cases with different subject IDs should reproduce the error).
  2. Construct a config (model and training parameters don't matter) but have this key for preprocessing:
data_preprocessing:
  {
    'normalize_nonZero',
    'crop_external_zero_planes',
  }
patch_sampler:
  {
    'type': 'label', 
  } 
  1. Run the gandlf_preprocess script for both these cases.
  2. See it pass for the one with ~180 cases and fail for ~720 cases. This is with 250G RAM.

Expected behavior
It should run for both.

Screenshots
N.A.

GaNDLF Version

0.0.18-dev

Desktop (please complete the following information):
N.A.

Additional context
Memory profiler (thanks @hasan7n): https://pypi.org/project/memory-profiler/

@VukW
Copy link
Contributor

VukW commented Feb 26, 2024

Is the corresponding BraTS data publicly available? Can you provide it also, please?

@sarthakpati
Copy link
Collaborator Author

You should be able to download the data here: https://www.synapse.org/brats

And this should be replicable even on the unit testing data [ref].

Do you think you can include the report from #806 into your fix as well (since both related to memory consumption)?

@sarthakpati sarthakpati added the bug Something isn't working label Feb 26, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

Stale issue message

@sarthakpati
Copy link
Collaborator Author

This is still under investigation.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants