4 ms·
And that's good, but not enough. 1.7 seconds just to load libraries is just too much.
by shakow 3y ago
And that's good, but not enough. 1.7 seconds just to load libraries is just too much.
- Nanana909 3y agoThen precompile or use https://github.com/dmolina/DaemonMode.jl https://github.com/dmolina/DaemonMode.jl. But 1.7 seconds at first startup isn't even enough time to articulate a serious thought, much less write any good code. I struggle to believe it's a dent in anyones workflow.
- shakow 3y agoI exposed my use case in the comment chain below; DaemonMode won't help there. > I struggle to believe it's a dent in anyones workflow. This is exactly what I dislike in the Julia community, the ‶if I don't have this issue, then the ones meeting it are holding it wrong″ attitude.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- adgjlsfhk1 3y agogood news is 1.10 already is shaping up to be about 2x faster.
- shakow 3y agoSo ~0.85"? Python is not compiled and start & load pandas (which is comparable to the libraries loaded in the article) in ~0.4" on my computer, and that's a notoriously slow language. If I were to use e.g. Rust with polars, load time would be virtually none. And when I have to process ~50k different datasets, I can't afford 0.85" per file, which would translate to ~11 hours of overhead.
- Nanana909 3y ago> If I were to use e.g. Rust with polars, load time would be virtually none. Because you're compiling... And if you need to do the same in Julia, you should also pre-compile or some other method like https://github.com/dmolina/DaemonMode.jl https://github.com/dmolina/DaemonMode.jl (their demo shows loading a database, with subsequent loads after the first one taking roughly ~0.2% of the first)
- adgjlsfhk1 3y agoIt's not 0.85 per file. It's 0.85 for the 50k files combined.
- shakow 3y agoNo, because the program has to be run by slurm over several compute nodes, so it can't process them all at once.
- adgjlsfhk1 3y agoas long as you don't have 50k computers, it still should be 0.85 seconds per node which is still tiny.
- shakow 3y ago> it still should be 0.85 seconds per node No it's not, because I will not architecture my whole pipeline & program around Julia inability to start in maybe a second in a year or 1.7" now, I will just use another language.
- ksec 3y agoWhen is 1.10 expected? Just wondering I did a quick google and it seems a lot of the 1.9 improvement were back ported from 1.10? Or is that really 2x on top of current 1.9?
- adgjlsfhk1 3y ago1.10 feature freeze is going to be in the next few weeks. after that it will be a few months depending on how much is required to fix all the bugs that have probably been introduced. 1.9 mostly doesn't shorten loading times (although weak dependencies end up helping a bit). 1.10 has had a bunch of load time optimization which became a lot more obvious once 1.9 got rid of all the stupid stuff. the exact speedups are package dependent, but 2x is a good estimate. some packages get a lot more, some are about the same.
- ksec 3y agoThanks. Exciting times for Julia!