layout | title | subtitle | minutes |
---|---|---|---|
page |
Intermediate R for reproducible scientific analysis |
parallel progamming |
20 |
- To understand the concept of "embarassingly parallel" problems
- To be able to set up a parallel backend for R
- To be able to effectively parallelise for loops using the foreach package
- To be able to assess the overall runtime of a piece of code in R.
Some problems encountered in scientific research fall into the category known as "embarrasingly parallel": analyses which require a very large number of calculations, but whose calculations do not depend on each other. A classic example of this comes from genetics: Genome-wide association studies involve the testing of hundreds of thousands of genetic variants across the genome for an association with a disease or trait. Each genetic variant can be tested independently, that is, the calculation of their association does not require the results of any of the other tests.
In this lesson we're going to learn how to parallelise this kind of task over multiple cores on your computer, and the pitfalls to avoid.
First, we need to tell R how many cores to use for any parallel calculation. For this lesson we will tell R to use one less core than the total number of cores on our machine: this leaves one processor free for other tasks while calculations happen in the background:
library(doParallel)
## Loading required package: foreach
## Loading required package: iterators
## Loading required package: parallel
cl <- makeCluster(2)
registerDoParallel(cl)
In practice you should never register more cores with R than you have on your computer, otherwise the parallel calculations might cause your computer to "thrash": grind to a halt and run extremely slowly. Note even the parallel calculations will run extremely slowly, so this offers no advantage.
The
detectCores
function will tell you how many cores you can safely parallelise over:library(parallel) detectCores()
## [1] 8
There are several components to a parallel for loop. Let's learn through an example:
# Load in the parallel for loop library
library(foreach)
# Get a list of countries
countries <- unique(gap$country)
# Calculate the change in life expectancy over the last 55 years for each country
diffLifeExp <- foreach(cc = countries, .combine=rbind, .packages="data.table") %dopar% {
diffLE <- gap[country == cc, max(lifeExp) - min(lifeExp)]
data.table(
country=cc,
diffLifeExp=diffLE
)
}
diffLifeExp
## country diffLifeExp
## 1: Afghanistan 15.027
## 2: Albania 21.193
## 3: Algeria 29.224
## 4: Angola 12.716
## 5: Argentina 12.835
## ---
## 138: Vietnam 33.837
## 139: West Bank and Gaza 30.262
## 140: Yemen Rep. 30.150
## 141: Zambia 12.628
## 142: Zimbabwe 22.362
Here, we use the foreach
function instead of a for
loop. The %dopar%
operator immediately after the foreach()
function tells foreach
to run its
calculations (i.e. the body of the foreach loop) independently across multiple
cores.
If we are parallelising over 4 cores, the calculations for the first four countries will run in parallel: the change in life expectancy will be calculated for Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, and Angola at the same time, these results will be returned, then the next four countries will be calculated, and so on.
Just like the apply
family of functions, the results of the last line in the
body of the foreach loop will be returned and combined by foreach
. The default
is to combine the results into a list
, just like lapply
. However, we can
specify a different function to combine our results with using the .combine
argument. Here we have told foreach
to use the rbind
function, so that each
result becomes a row in a new data.table
.
Finally, we use the .packages
argument to tell foreach
which packages it
needs for the calculations in the body of the foreach
loop. The parallel
calculations happen in independent R sessions, so each of these R sessions needs
to be aware of the packages it needs to run the calculations.
Parallelisation doesn't come for free: there is a communication overhead in sending objects to and receiving objects from each parallel core.
In the following examples, we will calculate the mean global life expectancy in
each year, and use system.time
to examine the total runtime of the code.
years <- unique(gap$year)
runtime1 <- system.time({
meanLifeExp <- foreach(
yy = years,
.packages="data.table"
) %dopar% {
mean(gap[year == yy, lifeExp])
}
})
runtime1
## user system elapsed
## 0.010 0.001 0.023
The system.time
function takes an some R code (wrapped in curly braces, {
,
}
), runs it, then returns the total time taken by the code to run. In this
case we care about the "elapsed" field: this gives the "real" time taken by the
computer to run the code. The "user" and "system" fields provide information
about CPU time taken by various levels of the operating system, see
help("proc.time")
.
This was actually a very inefficient way to parallelise our code. Since there
are 12 different years
, the code is sending out the calculations
for 1952 and 1957 to the two cores, collecting the results, then
sending out 1962 and 1967 and so on.
It is much more effective to break the problem into "chunks": one for each
parallel core. The itertools
package provides useful functions that integrate
with foreach
for solving this. Here we'll use isplitVector
to split years
into two chunks, then on each parallel core, use a non-parallelised (serial)
foreach
loop to run the calculations for each year. Note we need to tell each
parallel core about the foreach
package. We'll also use the getDoParWorkers
function to automatically detect how many cores we have registered. This means
you can return with a different number of cores later without having to update
values throughout your code:
library(itertools)
runtime2 <- system.time({
meanLifeExp <- foreach(
chunk = isplitVector(years, chunks=getDoParWorkers()),
.packages=c("foreach", "data.table")
) %dopar% {
foreach(yy = chunk, .combine=rbind) %do% {
mean(gap[year == yy, lifeExp])
}
}
})
runtime2
## user system elapsed
## 0.007 0.000 0.054
Suprisingly this code was much slower!
So what happened? In this case the overhead of setting up the parallel code
efficiently outweighed the benefits. Since we're working with a toy dataset, the
actual calculations are very, very, fast. In comparison to our first example,
we've now added the foreach
package, which gets loaded in each new R session,
as well as the chunking of tasks through isplitVector
. Together, these take
longer than the actual calculations!
For example we run the code not in parallel using sapply
we see the fastest
overall time:
runtime3 <- system.time({
meanLifeExp <- sapply(years, function(yy) {
mean(gap[year == yy, lifeExp])
})
})
runtime3
## user system elapsed
## 0.012 0.000 0.013
Finally, an important consideration when parallelising code is deciding how many cores is the most effective for the task at hand. With too many cores the chunks can become small enough that the communication and setup overhead outweighs the benefit.