Improve peak memory by pushing sorting of large tables upstream of functions #148
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Large tables being sorted inside functions doubles the peak memory required, even if the parent caller is replacing the original table with some version of the sorted one. This is because the python garbage collector is not smart enough to know that the higher level reference is going to be replaced and a table sort duplicates the data (the same goes for defragmentation).
The next area to look at here is the test orbit ephemeris generation, as there are lots of id sorting and comparisons done. I think with some smart adjustments we may be able to reduce the peak memory there as well.