speeding up deep graphs

[ekg]

On deep graphs (2k-fold) I'm seeing gfaffix taking quite a bit of time. It's essentially single threaded, right? Is there a possible way to adapt it to operate in parallel?

[danydoerr]

There is potential for speedup by multithreading parts of GFAffix, especially if the bottle neck is the graph traversal. I'd be interested in knowing which step in the algorithm affects the running time on these deep graphs. The graph traversal can be parallelized, but it's not embarrassingly parallelizable, as the graph editing (which is intertwined in the graph traversal) can only be done safely in a single thread.

[natir]

If you give me some sample dataset I can try to perform runtime analysis and try to improve running time by parallelized or not.

[danydoerr]

@ekg do you have such a "deep graph" handy?

[natir]

Or just smaller but similar graph.

[ekg]

Yes, but they are big. I don't think you need to use a deep graph to see if parallelism can help. Probably a chunk of the MHC will be enough to profile, or any graph that you've already used for testing that takes e.g. 5-10s to process.

…

On Thu, May 19, 2022, 14:42 Daniel Doerr ***@***.***> wrote: @ekg <https://github.com/ekg> do you have such a "deep graph" handy? — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#2 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AABDQEM2VS4UROFRWBP62ILVKYZKHANCNFSM5WEPZ5WQ> . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[danydoerr]

Do these deep graphs have a particular high node degree, or is the number of nodes exceptionally high?

[ekg]

High node degree and path depth. 2k fold coverage

…

On Thu, May 19, 2022, 15:07 Daniel Doerr ***@***.***> wrote: Do these deep graphs have a particular high node degree, or is the number of nodes exceptionally high? — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#2 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AABDQEKGUXR4IN3CXK47MALVKY4KRANCNFSM5WEPZ5WQ> . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[danydoerr]

GFAffix should scale linearly with path depth, overall this shouldn't dominate the runtime. But node degree is certainly a bottle neck.

[natir]

@ekg Could you give me advise how to build a similar graph, type of data, pipeline, tools, etc…

[ekg]

@natir sorry to take a while here. I may need to share this somehow, but the graph is rather large and will take 4 days to build if you do so from scratch. I'll see if I can get a simpler test case together.

[danydoerr]

@ekg Just so you know that your issue is not forgotten: I have a solution for parallelizing GFAffix and will work on this sometime soonish.

[AndreaGuarracino]

@danydoerr any updates on the parallelization?

[danydoerr]

@AndreaGuarracino thanks for asking. I'm preparing a release that should be out in the next few days. Do you want to have already a binary to test on? I'm also changing the cli...

[AndreaGuarracino]

Of course, please 'exit' the binary xD

…

________________________________ From: Daniel Doerr ***@***.***> Sent: Friday, December 20, 2024 03:31 To: marschall-lab/GFAffix ***@***.***> Cc: Andrea Guarracino ***@***.***>; Mention ***@***.***> Subject: Re: [marschall-lab/GFAffix] speeding up deep graphs (Issue #2) @AndreaGuarracino<https://github.com/AndreaGuarracino> thanks for asking. I'm preparing a release that should be out in the next few days. Do you want to have already a binary to test on? I'm also changing the cli... — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<#2 (comment)>, or unsubscribe<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AO26XHWFI4VP52KTV7UBVPD2GPPYTAVCNFSM6AAAAABT56CEJKVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDKNJWGYYTGMBUGY>. You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[danydoerr]

@AndreaGuarracino voilà gfaffix-0.2.0-prerelease.tar.gz