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

large performance regression in calling JuMP.build using MathProgBase in 1.0 #152

Closed
ExpandingMan opened this issue Aug 28, 2018 · 5 comments

Comments

@ExpandingMan
Copy link
Contributor

In my case from a few seconds to almost 2 minutes. I know it's coming from the call to JuMP.build on the model, but I don't know where yet.

Sorry for the lack of details, will look into it as soon as I get the chance, wanted to open this issue to keep track.

@ExpandingMan
Copy link
Contributor Author

Ok, first update it seems to be slow on MathProgBase.loadproblem! which happens in JuMP solvers.jl line 372.

@odow
Copy link
Member

odow commented Aug 28, 2018

That's weird because very little has changed in Gurobi.jl with respect to MathProgBase. However, there are known performance issues with LQOI using Gurobi via MOI at the moment.

@ExpandingMan
Copy link
Contributor Author

ExpandingMan commented Aug 29, 2018

Ok, finally traced this down and the result is a bit scary.

The regression is due to a call of sparse(transpose(A)) where A is sparse here. This regression apparently scales very badly with the size of the matrix, which in my case is (97864, 161284).

The function call in question is in SparseArrays in sparsematrix.jl somewhere in the call to SparseMatrixCSC at line 374.

At first glance I'm not at all sure about what to do as a work-around, but we'll definitely need something or this will never work for large problems in 1.0.

@ExpandingMan
Copy link
Contributor Author

Ah, so happy there is a simple fix! This could have been quite the headache to fix. PR incoming.

@ExpandingMan ExpandingMan mentioned this issue Aug 29, 2018
@ExpandingMan
Copy link
Contributor Author

Will be fixed by #153

@odow odow closed this as completed in 4a66f1a Aug 29, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants