Skip to content
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

fix: lower num_workers to 4 #4535

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jan 7, 2025
Merged

fix: lower num_workers to 4 #4535

merged 2 commits into from
Jan 7, 2025

Conversation

caic99
Copy link
Member

@caic99 caic99 commented Jan 6, 2025

For multi-task training in pytorch, each data source will have their own dataloader. If the number of workers of dataloaders is large, there will be many (number of tasks * num_workers) worker processes stressing CPU.

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Performance Optimization
    • Adjusted default maximum worker configuration from 8 to 4 CPUs
    • Reduced potential parallel processing resources for the environment
  • Documentation
    • Updated documentation to reflect the change in default value for NUM_WORKERS from 8 to 4

For multi-task training in pytorch, each data source will have their own dataloader. If the number of workers of dataloaders is large, there will be many worker processes stressing CPU.

Signed-off-by: Chun Cai <[email protected]>
Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Jan 6, 2025

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The pull request modifies the default value of the NUM_WORKERS variable in both the environment utility file and the documentation. The default value is changed from 8 to 4 while retaining the logic that sets it to the minimum of the configured value and the available CPU count. This adjustment may affect the parallel processing capabilities in the application's environment.

Changes

File Change Summary
deepmd/pt/utils/env.py Updated default NUM_WORKERS from min(8, ncpus) to min(4, ncpus)
doc/env.md Changed default value of environment variable NUM_WORKERS from 8 to 4

This change reduces the maximum number of workers that can be configured for data loading in the PyTorch backend.


Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

❤️ Share
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR. (Beta)
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

Copy link
Member

@njzjz njzjz left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
doc/env.md (1)

Line range hint 75-80: Consider adding a note about performance implications.

To help users make informed decisions, consider adding a note explaining:

  1. The trade-off between CPU usage and data loading performance
  2. Guidelines for adjusting this value based on specific workload requirements (e.g., single-task vs multi-task training)

Example addition:

 {{ pytorch_icon }} Number of subprocesses to use for data loading in the PyTorch backend.
 See [PyTorch documentation](https://pytorch.org/docs/stable/data.html) for details.
+
+Note: The default value is optimized for multi-task training scenarios to prevent excessive CPU usage. For single-task training or if you have sufficient CPU resources, you may increase this value to potentially improve data loading performance.
📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between c7435a8 and 3fdf2b7.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • doc/env.md (1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (1)
doc/env.md (1)

75-75: Documentation accurately reflects the implementation change.

The updated default value aligns with the PR objective to reduce CPU usage in multi-task training scenarios.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 6, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 84.57%. Comparing base (8d4c27b) to head (3fdf2b7).
Report is 3 commits behind head on devel.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##            devel    #4535      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   84.57%   84.57%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         675      675              
  Lines       63695    63695              
  Branches     3488     3488              
==========================================
- Hits        53872    53871       -1     
  Misses       8698     8698              
- Partials     1125     1126       +1     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@caic99 caic99 requested a review from njzjz January 7, 2025 01:42
@njzjz njzjz added this pull request to the merge queue Jan 7, 2025
Merged via the queue into deepmodeling:devel with commit 38dc5c9 Jan 7, 2025
61 checks passed
@caic99 caic99 deleted the patch-3 branch January 7, 2025 09:30
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants