Welcome to OGeek Q&A Community for programmer and developer-Open, Learning and Share
Welcome To Ask or Share your Answers For Others

Categories

0 votes
816 views
in Technique[技术] by (71.8m points)

sorting - Thrust: sort_by_key slow due to memory allocation

I am doing a sort_by_key with key-value int arrays of size 80 million. The device is a GTX 560 Ti with 2GB VRAM. When the available (free) memory before the sort_by_key is 1200MB, it finishes sorting in 200ms. But, when the available memory drops to 600MB, the sort_by_key for the same key-value arrays takes 1.5-3s!

I ran the program under Compute Visual Profiler. I found that the GPU timestamp jumps by 1.5-3s between the last kernel before sort_by_key and the first kernel call inside sort_by_key (which is a RakingReduction).

I suspect there is a memory allocation being done inside sort_by_key, before it calls its first internal kernel. The memory that sort_by_key needs is available (even when available memory is 600MB) since the sort_by_key works, even though it is slower. I see that the computer freezes for 1s when this happens. I also see a bump in the CPU Physical Memory graph if I keep Process Explorer open.

Is there anything I can do to make this sort_by_key work just as fast when available memory is lesser? Also, what is happening between the device and host that is causing the memory bump and temporary freezing?

See Question&Answers more detail:os

与恶龙缠斗过久,自身亦成为恶龙;凝视深渊过久,深渊将回以凝视…
Welcome To Ask or Share your Answers For Others

1 Reply

0 votes
by (71.8m points)

thrust::sort_by_key indeed allocates temporary space of O(N) -- radix sort is not an in-place sort when it is larger than can be done by a single multiprocessor. Therefore you need at least 80M * 2 * sizeof(int) = 640MB for the input data, plus space for the temporaries, which must be at least 320MB for this sort. I'm not sure exactly why the sort doesn't just fail when you don't have enough memory -- perhaps 600 MB is a low estimate, or perhaps thrust is falling back to CPU execution (I doubt it does that).

Another idea about the performance drop is that when you need almost all of the available memory, there might be a bit of fragmentation in the available memory that the driver/runtime has to deal with in order to allocate such large arrays, causing extra overhead.

BTW, how are you measuring available memory?


与恶龙缠斗过久,自身亦成为恶龙;凝视深渊过久,深渊将回以凝视…
OGeek|极客中国-欢迎来到极客的世界,一个免费开放的程序员编程交流平台!开放,进步,分享!让技术改变生活,让极客改变未来! Welcome to OGeek Q&A Community for programmer and developer-Open, Learning and Share
Click Here to Ask a Question

...