Why is indexing into an numpy array that slow?

[Rüdiger Werner]

Hello!

Out of curiosity and to learn a little bit about the numpy package i've
tryed to implement
a vectorised version of the 'Sieve of Zakiya'.

While the code itself works fine it is astounding for me that the numpy
Version is almost 7 times slower than
the pure python version. I tryed to find out if i am doing something wrong
but wasn't able to find any answer.

Some experimentation showed that indexing into an numpy array is the
bottleneck that slows down my code.
However i don't understand why.

So i am looking for any explaination why the numpy version is that slow
(i expected it to be at least as fast as the pure python version).

Thank you in advance

>pythonw -u "PrimeSieve .py"

5 Erat: 0.000000 ZakijaP5: 0.000000 VZakijaP5: 0.000000
1000005 Erat: 0.219000 ZakijaP5: 0.219000 VZakijaP5: 1.578000
2000005 Erat: 0.468000 ZakijaP5: 0.469000 VZakijaP5: 3.297000
3000005 Erat: 0.719000 ZakijaP5: 0.703000 VZakijaP5: 5.000000
4000005 Erat: 0.937000 ZakijaP5: 0.985000 VZakijaP5: 6.734000
5000005 Erat: 1.219000 ZakijaP5: 1.218000 VZakijaP5: 8.172000
6000005 Erat: 1.500000 ZakijaP5: 1.531000 VZakijaP5: 9.829000
7000005 Erat: 1.781000 ZakijaP5: 1.813000 VZakijaP5: 11.500000
8000005 Erat: 2.047000 ZakijaP5: 2.094000 VZakijaP5: 13.187000
9000005 Erat: 2.312000 ZakijaP5: 2.391000 VZakijaP5: 14.891000
10000005 Erat: 2.578000 ZakijaP5: 2.672000 VZakijaP5: 16.641000
11000005 Erat: 2.891000 ZakijaP5: 2.953000 VZakijaP5: 18.203000
12000005 Erat: 3.110000 ZakijaP5: 3.297000 VZakijaP5: 19.937000

#------------------------------
Prime_Sieves.py--------------------------------------
from math import sqrt
def sieveOfErat(end ):
if end < 2: return []
lng = (end-1)>>1
sieve = [True]*(lng+1)
for i in xrange(int(sqrt (end)) >1):
if not sieve[i]: continue
for j in xrange( (i*(i + 3) << 1) + 3, lng, (i << 1) + 3):
sieve[j] = False
primes = [2]
primes.extend([(i << 1) + 3 for i in xrange(lng) if sieve[i]])
return primes

def SoZP5(val):
if val < 3 : return [2]
if val < 5 : return [2,3]
lndx = (val-1)/2
sieve = [0]*(lndx+15)
sieve[0:14] = 0 , 1 , 2, 0, 4, 5, 0, 7, 8, 0, 10, 0, 0, 13
for _i in xrange(14, lndx , 15):
sieve[_i:_i+15] = _i -1, 0, 0, _i + 2 , 0, _i + 4, _i + 5, 0, _i +7,
_i + 8, 0, _i + 10, 0, 0, _i + 13

for i in xrange(2, (int(sqrt(val))-3/2)+1):
if not sieve[i]: continue
k = 30*i+45
p1 = 7*i+9 # 7 (2i+3)
p2 = 11*i+15 # 11 (2i+3)
p3 = 13*i+18 # 13 (2i+3)
p4 = 17*i+24 # 17 (2i+3)
p5 = 19*i+27 # 19 (2i+3)
p6 = 23*i+33 # 23 (2i+3)
p7 = 29*i+42 # 29 (2i+3)
p8 = 31*i+45 # 31 (2i+3)
for _i in xrange(0, lndx, k):
try:
sieve[_i+p1] = 0
sieve[_i+p2] = 0
sieve[_i+p3] = 0
sieve[_i+p4] = 0
sieve[_i+p5] = 0
sieve[_i+p6] = 0
sieve[_i+p7] = 0
sieve[_i+p8] = 0
except (IndexError, ):
break

primes = [(i*2)+3 for i in xrange(2, lndx) if sieve[i]]
primes[0:0] = [2,3,5]
return primes

from numpy import array, zeros
def VSoZP5(val):
""" Vectorised Version of Sieve of Zakia"""
if val < 3 : return [2]
if val < 5 : return [2,3]
lndx = (val-1)/2
sieve = zeros(lndx+15,d type="int32") #<-- Offending line: Indexing a
numpy array is slow
sieve[0:14] = 0 , 1 , 2, 0, 4, 5, 0, 7, 8, 0, 10, 0, 0, 13
for _i in xrange(14, lndx , 15):
sieve[_i:_i+15] = _i -1, 0, 0, _i + 2 , 0, _i + 4, _i + 5, 0, _i +7,
_i + 8, 0, _i + 10, 0, 0, _i + 13

om = array([9, 15, 18, 24, 27, 33, 42, 45], dtype="int32")
bm = array([7, 11, 13, 17, 19, 23, 29, 31], dtype="int32")
for i in xrange(2, (int(sqrt(val))-3/2)+1):
if not sieve[i]: continue
k = 30*i+45
rm = (bm * i) + om
for _i in xrange(0, lndx/k + 1):
try:
sieve[rm] = 0 #<-- Offending line: Indexing a numpy array
is slow
rm += k
except (IndexError,):
break
#
primes = [(i*2)+3 for i in xrange(2, lndx) if sieve[i]]
primes[0:0] = [2,3,5]
return primes

if __name__ == '__main__':
import time

for j in range(5, 20000007, 1000000):
print j,

a = time.time()
soe = sieveOfErat(j)
print "Erat: %2f" % (time.time() -a,),

a = time.time()
soz5 = SoZP5(j)
print "ZakijaP5: %2f" % (time.time() -a),

a = time.time()
sovz5 = VSoZP5(j)
print "VZakijaP5: %2f" % (time.time() -a)

assert soe == soz5 == sovz5
#------------------------------
Prime_Sieves.py--------------------------------------

[Robert Kern]

Rüdiger Werner wrote:

Hello!

Hi!

numpy questions are best answered on the numpy mailing list.

http://www.scipy.org/Mailing_Lists

Out of curiosity and to learn a little bit about the numpy package i've
tryed to implement
a vectorised version of the 'Sieve of Zakiya'.

While the code itself works fine it is astounding for me that the numpy
Version is almost 7 times slower than
the pure python version. I tryed to find out if i am doing something wrong
but wasn't able to find any answer.

The result of indexing into a numpy array is a numpy scalar object. We do this
instead of returning a float or an int because numpy supports many more data
types than just a C double or long, respectively. If I have a uint16 array,
indexing into it gives me a uint16 numpy scalar. These are a little more
complicated to set up than a regular Python float or int, so they take more time
to create.

--
Robert Kern

"I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma
that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had
an underlying truth."
-- Umberto Eco

[bearophileHUGS]

Rüdiger Werner:

So i am looking for any explaination why the numpy version is that slow
(i expected it to be at least as fast as the pure python version).

For speed use Psyco with array.array. Psyco is available for Python
2.6 too now.

Bye,
bearophile

[Robert Kern]

Robert Kern wrote:

Rüdiger Werner wrote:

>Hello!

Hi!

numpy questions are best answered on the numpy mailing list.

http://www.scipy.org/Mailing_Lists

>Out of curiosity and to learn a little bit about the numpy package
i've tryed to implement
a vectorised version of the 'Sieve of Zakiya'.

While the code itself works fine it is astounding for me that the
numpy Version is almost 7 times slower than
the pure python version. I tryed to find out if i am doing something
wrong but wasn't able to find any answer.

The result of indexing into a numpy array is a numpy scalar object. We
do this instead of returning a float or an int because numpy supports
many more data types than just a C double or long, respectively. If I
have a uint16 array, indexing into it gives me a uint16 numpy scalar.
These are a little more complicated to set up than a regular Python
float or int, so they take more time to create.

Taking a closer look, that's only part of the problem. The larger problem is
that the numpy code wasn't vectorized enough to actually make use of numpy's
capabilities. You were paying for the overhead numpy imposes without coding in
such a way to make use of numpy's efficiencies. Here is my version that is more
than two times faster than the others. I didn't know exactly which details were
critical to the algorithm and which weren't (e.g. lndx+15), so there's some
gorpiness that can probably be removed. If you don't actually need to convert
back to a list, then you can be about 3 times faster than the others.

from numpy import arange, array, newaxis, zeros
def VSoZP5(val):
""" Vectorised Version of Sieve of Zakia"""
if val < 3 : return [2]
if val < 5 : return [2,3]
lndx = (val-1)/2
sieve = zeros(lndx+15,d type="int32")
sieve[0:14] = 0 , 1 , 2, 0, 4, 5, 0, 7, 8, 0, 10, 0, 0, 13
_i = arange(14, lndx, 15)
if lndx 14:
sieve[14:-14:15] = _i - 1
sieve[17:-11:15] = _i + 2
sieve[19:-9:15] = _i + 4
sieve[20:-8:15] = _i + 5
sieve[22:-6:15] = _i + 7
sieve[23:-5:15] = _i + 8
sieve[25:-3:15] = _i + 10
sieve[28::15] = _i + 13
om = array([9, 15, 18, 24, 27, 33, 42, 45], dtype="int32")
bm = array([7, 11, 13, 17, 19, 23, 29, 31], dtype="int32")
for i in xrange(2, (int(sqrt(val))-3/2)+1):
if not sieve[i]: continue
k = 30*i+45
rm = (bm * i) + om
rm2 = (rm + k * arange(0, lndx/k + 1)[:,newaxis]).flat
rm3 = rm2[rm2 < len(sieve)]
sieve[rm3] = 0
sieve = sieve[2:lndx]
primes = (2*arange(2, lndx) + 3)[sieve 0].tolist()
primes[0:0] = [2,3,5]
return primes

--
Robert Kern

"I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma
that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had
an underlying truth."
-- Umberto Eco