-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 19
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
Memory consumption with collect()
#434
Comments
Thanks, we need to work on the docs here. Can you try: duck_exec("set memory_limit='1GB'") or a similar value? |
Mmmhhh.... I added that line just after loading the duckplyr library, but I still have the RAM consumption going through the roof of my system. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Thanks, confirming that, on a VM with 4 GB with Debian Bookworm running in OrbStack, the following example is killed: options(conflicts.policy = list(warn = FALSE))
library(dplyr)
library(duckplyr)
library(readr)
if (!file.exists("test.csv")) {
dd <- tibble(x=1:100000000, y=rep(LETTERS[1:20], 5000000))
write_csv(dd, "test.csv")
}
duck_exec("set memory_limit='1GB'")
df <- duck_csv("test.csv")
df_stat <- df |>
summarise(total=sum(x), .by = y)
df_out <- df |>
left_join(y=df_stat, by=c("y")) |>
collect()
df_out |
left_join()
I see. I have 8Gb in my machine and I opened the issue because I can run the code with arrow on my machine (with some difficulties), but not with duckplyr. No intention to start a competition between the two tools, but I assumed there may be a memory leak in duckplyr |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
To finish this off on my side: if I kill almost any other process, duckplyr also gets the job done on my machine, but the memory consumption is significantly higher than under arrow. |
I'm no longer sure that The following example works, even with 4 GB: options(conflicts.policy = list(warn = FALSE))
library(dplyr)
library(duckplyr)
library(readr)
if (!file.exists("test.csv")) {
dd <- tibble(x=1:100000000, y=rep(LETTERS[1:20], 5000000))
write_csv(dd, "test.csv")
}
duck_exec("set memory_limit='1GB'")
df <- duck_csv("test.csv")
df_stat <- df |>
summarise(total=sum(x), .by = y)
df_out <-
df |>
left_join(y=df_stat, by=c("y")) |>
compute_parquet("test.parquet")
df_out Perhaps you can also use The large memory consumption is still interesting, though. |
Thanks. I now also have the procedure to convert a csv into an parquet file without ingesting everything into memory. |
left_join()
collect()
I looked at this a little closer. With A modified, scaled-down version of the example that works with current duckplyr, to illustrate the overhead: options(conflicts.policy = list(warn = FALSE))
library(dplyr)
library(duckplyr)
#> ✔ Overwriting dplyr methods with duckplyr methods.
#> ℹ Turn off with `duckplyr::methods_restore()`.
library(readr)
res_size_kb <- function() {
pid_switch <- if (Sys.info()[["sysname"]] == "Darwin") "-p" else "-q"
cmd_line <- paste0("ps x -o rss ", pid_switch, " ", Sys.getpid())
as.numeric(system(cmd_line, intern = TRUE)[[2]])
}
N <- 500000
path <- paste0("test-", N, ".csv")
if (!file.exists(path)) {
dd <- tibble(x = seq.int(N * 20), y = rep(1:20, N))
write_csv(dd, path)
}
pillar::num(file.size(path), notation = "si")
#> <pillar_num(si)[1]>
#> [1] 98.9M
db_exec("set memory_limit='1GB'")
df <- read_csv_duckdb(path)
df_stat <- df |>
summarise(total = sum(x), .by = y)
df_join <- df |>
left_join(y = df_stat, by = c("y"))
res_size_before <- res_size_kb()
df_out <-
df_join |>
collect()
# At the very latest, materialization happens here:
rows <- nrow(df_out)
res_size_after <- res_size_kb()
# Approximation, for speed
obj_size_bytes <- object.size(df_out[rep(NA_integer_, 1000), ]) * rows / 1000
obj_size <- as.numeric(obj_size_bytes) / 1024
pillar::num(rows, notation = "si")
#> <pillar_num(si)[1]>
#> [1] 10M
pillar::num(c(res_size_after, res_size_before, obj_size), notation = "si")
#> <pillar_num(si)[3]>
#> [1] 732.k 267.k 245.k
(res_size_after - res_size_before) / obj_size
#> [1] 1.894857 Created on 2025-01-17 with reprex v2.1.1 |
I did some digging around based @krlmlr's research. To me it seems that we cannot release the query results immediately after materialization. If I've understood correctly, the query result (a set of vectors) is not transformed to it's R-representation immediately after materialization. Instead, vectors are transformed based on demand, ie. when they are touched. An example: df <- duck_csv("test.csv")
nrow(df) # 1. materializes the query, duckdb's result object is now available
head(df$x) # 2. transforms x into R-representation (see AltrepVectorWrapper::Dataptr())
# cannot release the query results as df$y has not been transformed yet
head(df) # 3. now all columns have been transformed -> the query result can be released duckdb/duckdb-r#1027 has a rough draft for a way to reduce the memory consumption by releasing the query results when they are no longer needed. The idea is to keeps tabs on how many of the vectors have been translated. And once all are transformed, reset the pointer to the query results. An alternative approach would be to expose the possibility to reset the pointer with an R-function. This way you could do Below is an example of the effect of the the change made in the PR (the memory consumption goes down). The latter reprex includes that logic outlined above, the former does not. Query results not released (current status)options(conflicts.policy = list(warn = FALSE))
library(dplyr)
library(duckplyr)
#> The duckplyr package is configured to fall back to dplyr when it encounters an
#> incompatibility. Fallback events can be collected and uploaded for analysis to
#> guide future development. By default, data will be collected but no data will
#> be uploaded.
#> ℹ Automatic fallback uploading is not controlled and therefore disabled, see
#> `?duckplyr::fallback()`.
#> ✔ Number of reports ready for upload: 4.
#> → Review with `duckplyr::fallback_review()`, upload with
#> `duckplyr::fallback_upload()`.
#> ℹ Configure automatic uploading with `duckplyr::fallback_config()`.
#> ✔ Overwriting dplyr methods with duckplyr methods.
#> ℹ Turn off with `duckplyr::methods_restore()`.
library(readr)
res_size_kb <- function() {
pid_switch <- if (Sys.info()[["sysname"]] == "Darwin") "-p" else "-q"
cmd_line <- paste0("ps x -o rss ", pid_switch, " ", Sys.getpid())
as.numeric(system(cmd_line, intern = TRUE)[[2]])
}
N <- 3000000
path <- paste0("test-", N, ".csv")
if (!file.exists(path)) {
dd <- tibble(x = seq.int(N * 20), y = rep(1:20, N))
write_csv(dd, path)
}
pillar::num(file.size(path), notation = "si")
#> <pillar_num(si)[1]>
#> [1] 682.M
db_exec("set memory_limit='1GB'")
df <- read_csv_duckdb(path)
df_stat <- df |>
summarise(total = sum(x), .by = y)
df_join <- df |>
left_join(y = df_stat, by = c("y"))
res_size_before <- res_size_kb()
df_out <-
df_join |>
collect()
# At the very latest, materialization happens here:
rows <- nrow(df_out)
# Releases the query result at DuckDB's end because all columns are now transformed to their R-representation
head(df_out)
#> # A tibble: 6 × 3
#> x y total
#> <dbl> <dbl> <dbl>
#> 1 1 1 9.00e13
#> 2 2 2 9.00e13
#> 3 3 3 9.00e13
#> 4 4 4 9.00e13
#> 5 5 5 9.00e13
#> 6 6 6 9.00e13
res_size_after <- res_size_kb()
# Approximation, for speed
obj_size_bytes <- object.size(df_out[rep(NA_integer_, 1000), ]) * rows / 1000
obj_size <- as.numeric(obj_size_bytes) / 1024
print(paste(c(res_size_after, res_size_before)/1e6,'Gb'))
#> [1] "3.977176 Gb" "0.686392 Gb"
pillar::num(c(res_size_after, res_size_before, obj_size), notation = "si")
#> <pillar_num(si)[3]>
#> [1] 3.98M 686. k 1.47M
print((res_size_after - res_size_before) / obj_size)
#> [1] 2.235777 Created on 2025-01-25 with reprex v2.1.1 Query results releasedoptions(conflicts.policy = list(warn = FALSE))
library(dplyr)
library(duckplyr)
#> The duckplyr package is configured to fall back to dplyr when it encounters an
#> incompatibility. Fallback events can be collected and uploaded for analysis to
#> guide future development. By default, data will be collected but no data will
#> be uploaded.
#> ℹ Automatic fallback uploading is not controlled and therefore disabled, see
#> `?duckplyr::fallback()`.
#> ✔ Number of reports ready for upload: 4.
#> → Review with `duckplyr::fallback_review()`, upload with
#> `duckplyr::fallback_upload()`.
#> ℹ Configure automatic uploading with `duckplyr::fallback_config()`.
#> ✔ Overwriting dplyr methods with duckplyr methods.
#> ℹ Turn off with `duckplyr::methods_restore()`.
library(readr)
res_size_kb <- function() {
pid_switch <- if (Sys.info()[["sysname"]] == "Darwin") "-p" else "-q"
cmd_line <- paste0("ps x -o rss ", pid_switch, " ", Sys.getpid())
as.numeric(system(cmd_line, intern = TRUE)[[2]])
}
N <- 3000000
path <- paste0("test-", N, ".csv")
if (!file.exists(path)) {
dd <- tibble(x = seq.int(N * 20), y = rep(1:20, N))
write_csv(dd, path)
}
pillar::num(file.size(path), notation = "si")
#> <pillar_num(si)[1]>
#> [1] 682.M
db_exec("set memory_limit='1GB'")
df <- read_csv_duckdb(path)
df_stat <- df |>
summarise(total = sum(x), .by = y)
df_join <- df |>
left_join(y = df_stat, by = c("y"))
res_size_before <- res_size_kb()
df_out <-
df_join |>
collect()
# At the very latest, materialization happens here:
rows <- nrow(df_out)
# Releases the query result at DuckDB's end because all columns are now transformed to their R-representation
head(df_out)
#> # A tibble: 6 × 3
#> x y total
#> <dbl> <dbl> <dbl>
#> 1 1 1 9.00e13
#> 2 2 2 9.00e13
#> 3 3 3 9.00e13
#> 4 4 4 9.00e13
#> 5 5 5 9.00e13
#> 6 6 6 9.00e13
res_size_after <- res_size_kb()
# Approximation, for speed
obj_size_bytes <- object.size(df_out[rep(NA_integer_, 1000), ]) * rows / 1000
obj_size <- as.numeric(obj_size_bytes) / 1024
print(paste(c(res_size_after, res_size_before)/1e6,'Gb'))
#> [1] "2.983336 Gb" "0.6863 Gb"
pillar::num(c(res_size_after, res_size_before, obj_size), notation = "si")
#> <pillar_num(si)[3]>
#> [1] 2.98M 686. k 1.47M
print((res_size_after - res_size_before) / obj_size)
#> [1] 1.560619 Created on 2025-01-25 with reprex v2.1.1 |
This now flies on top of my head. If under some circumstances collect() doubles the memory usage, then this is a very serious issue. |
Thanks for the investigation. Can we somehow "rip apart" a |
An interesting idea! A quick investigation: It seems that This makes it harder to assign the ownership & free memory of a specific column. Seems like it would get quite complex or what do you think? |
The alternative would be to live with the x2 overhead in memory consumption, or to try to be more efficient only when getting data from a table or a Parquet file. Let me think about it. |
Sorry, maybe I was a bit unclear. I don't think we can't release the memory, just that it's hard(er) to do column-wise. I was wondering if the added complexity is worth when comparing to options presented below. Two options come to mind: The downside of these compared to releasing memory per column is that we might transform columns to R-representation that otherwise would never get transformed. This can be somewhat mitigated by instructing users to select only columns needed (which makes sense anyways). With both one could explore the possibility of releasing the memory consumed by data chunks on the fly. So something like:
This has the benefit that at no point in time would we have the entire duckdb-query-result and it's R-representation in memory. |
Thanks. The two options you outlined are a good compromise, but, to me, it looks like peak memory consumption still will be twice of the data size. The package is still useful: memory usage can be controlled with the new concept of prudence (naming TBD, ex funneling). You can stay in DuckDB land for as long as the data is large, and |
Looks like my claim about the x2 memory consumption is wrong. I need to better understand your PR. |
Hello,
Please have a look at the reprex at the end of the file.
I have a seasoned laptop with 8Gb of RAM which runs debian stable.
When I carry out an aggregation and then a left join with arrow, I need to use some swap when I collect the result (a long dataframe), but I can run the computation.
Instead, if just run the part in duckplyr (commented out in the second part of the reprex), my memory is so insufficient that the laptop freezes. Can someone take a look into this? Is there a much higher memory consumption in duckplyr wrt arrow? Thanks a lot.
Created on 2025-01-01 with reprex v2.1.0
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: