I have very large data files (10 to 40 GB) which I want to plot as figures. A data file contains t matrices of size n x n. A data file of t=3 matrices of size n looks like:

1 2
3 6
1 2
3 3
4 2
5 1

Here is the code that does the job:

import itertools as it
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
import time

def printImage(M, k):
    figobj = plt.figure()
    fig = plt.imshow(M, interpolation='nearest')
    plt.savefig('%05d' % k + '.png', bbox_inches='tight', pad_inches=0, dpi=300)

n = 1000
t = 1000        

t0 = time.clock()
with open('data', 'r') as f:
    for i in range(t):
            items = [list(map(float, i.split())) for i in it.islice(f, n)]
        print(str(i) + '/' + str(t))

t1 = time.clock()

The processing speed for 1000 matrices of size 1000 x 1000 of this code is shown below: enter image description here The time is increasing and it takes about one second per image. I would like to know if I can increase the processing speed if I don't want to decrease quality?

  • \$\begingroup\$ @Graipher I think it would be faster to generate some matrices using np.random.rand(1000,1000) instead of uploading a file. \$\endgroup\$ – random9 Oct 31 '17 at 9:59

First, a baseline timing. Using this code to generate 5 random matrices:

import numpy as np

n, t = 1000, 5

with open("data", "w") as f:
    for _ in range(t):
        np.savetxt(np.random.randint(1000, size=(n, n)))

Your code takes about 10 seconds to execute on my machine.

Second, small stylistic fixes. Your try...except...else code is literally what Python basically does for every line anyway:

  1. It tries to execute the line.
  2. If this fails, raise an appropriate error.
  3. Otherwise go on with the next line.

So you can just remove that. In any case, you should never have a bar except, unless you are really sure what this means. You will not be able to abort the process using CTRL+C, for example.

You should also rename your function from printImage to print_image, to adhere to Python's official style-guide, PEP8.

Then, to improve the speed. This is quite tricky (as you might have discovered yourself already). These are the things I tried, but which failed to improve the time:

  1. Create the figure only once and reuse it. This was recommended here.
  2. Get rid of the GUI drawing completely, by using the underlying objects. This was recommended here.
  3. Use pandas.read_csv with a hack to read an iterator, as shown here.

What did make a huge difference is using 2. from above and using the multiprocessing module:

import itertools as it
import time

from matplotlib.backends.backend_agg import FigureCanvasAgg as FigureCanvas
from matplotlib.figure import Figure

import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
import multiprocessing

def timeit(func):
    def wrapper(*args, **kwargs):
        starting_time = time.clock()
        result = func(*args, **kwargs)
        ending_time = time.clock()
        print('Duration: {}'.format(ending_time - starting_time))
        return result
    return wrapper

def print_image_multiprocessing(n, t):
    p = multiprocessing.Pool(4)
    with open("data", "r") as f:
        items_gen = ([list(map(float, i.split())) for i in it.islice(f, n)]
                     for i in range(t))
        p.starmap(print_image_no_gui, zip(items_gen, it.count()))

def print_image_no_gui(items, i):
    fig = plt.Figure()
    ax = fig.add_subplot(111)
    image = ax.imshow(items, interpolation='nearest')
    canvas = FigureCanvas(fig)
    canvas.print_figure('mult%05d' % i + '.png', bbox_inches='tight',
                        pad_inches=0, dpi=300)
    print(str(i) + '/' + str(t))

if __name__ === "__main__":
    print_image_multiprocessing(1000, 5)

This takes less than 3 seconds (with the 4 workers), compared to 10 seconds, on my machine. For 10 images it needs 6 seconds, instead of 14. Not ideal, but I don't see any other obvious improvements.

Note that I removed the tight_layout, because it raises a warning per plot. According to this issue here, one can work-around it by using fig.set_tight_layout(True), but this then raises a different warning, complaining about the axes not being drawable. Since you remove the axis anyways, removing that call does no harm.

| improve this answer | |

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.