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

numba cache file is surprisedly large #9510

Closed
dlee992 opened this issue Mar 25, 2024 · 3 comments
Closed

numba cache file is surprisedly large #9510

dlee992 opened this issue Mar 25, 2024 · 3 comments
Labels
caching Issue involving caching needs triage/maintainer discussion For an issue/PR that needs discussion at a triage/maintainer meeting needtriage stale Marker label for stale issues.

Comments

@dlee992
Copy link
Contributor

dlee992 commented Mar 25, 2024

Hi, I met an use-case when enabling cache and using many nested record array and dict.

since CompileResult will also serialize several variables to the .nbc cache file, which makes my cache file pretty big, more than 10MB. And I have dozens of these jitted functions and some have different type signatures, which result in >1GB cache files.

def _reduce(self):

Not sure if it's expected or we can improve on that somehow.

@kc611 kc611 added needtriage caching Issue involving caching needs triage/maintainer discussion For an issue/PR that needs discussion at a triage/maintainer meeting labels Mar 26, 2024
@dlee992
Copy link
Contributor Author

dlee992 commented Apr 4, 2024

Hi, after maintainer triage, any feedback? @kc611 Thanks!

in principle numba cache files shouldn't be this large? I feel it could be related the __str__(a_type_instance) is a naive recursive definition, which results in this issue, given using nested dict, record array, and structref.

Copy link

github-actions bot commented May 5, 2024

This issue is marked as stale as it has had no activity in the past 30 days. Please close this issue if no further response or action is needed. Otherwise, please respond with any updates and confirm that this issue still needs to be addressed.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the stale Marker label for stale issues. label May 5, 2024
@dlee992
Copy link
Contributor Author

dlee992 commented May 7, 2024

closing this for now, since I lack of concrete test case to show this.

@dlee992 dlee992 closed this as completed May 7, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
caching Issue involving caching needs triage/maintainer discussion For an issue/PR that needs discussion at a triage/maintainer meeting needtriage stale Marker label for stale issues.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants