austin VS py-spy

I collected a list of profilers (also memory profilers, also specifically for Python) here: https://github.com/albertz/wiki/blob/master/profiling.md

Currently I actually need a Python memory profiler, because I want to figure out whether there is some memory leak in my application (PyTorch based training script), and where exactly (in this case, it's not a problem of GPU memory, but CPU memory).

I tried Scalene (https://github.com/plasma-umass/scalene), which seems to be powerful, but somehow the output it gives me is not useful at all? It doesn't really give me a flamegraph, or a list of the top lines with memory allocations, but instead it gives me a listing of all source code lines, and prints some (very sparse) information on each line. So I need to search through that listing now by hand to find the spots? Maybe I just don't know how to use it properly.

I tried Memray, but first ran into an issue (https://github.com/bloomberg/memray/issues/212), but after using some workaround, it worked now. I get a flamegraph out, but it doesn't really seem accurate? After a while, there don't seem to be any new memory allocations at all anymore, and I don't quite trust that this is correct.

There is also Austin (https://github.com/P403n1x87/austin), which I also wanted to try (have not yet).

Somehow this experience so far was very disappointing.

(Side node, I debugged some very strange memory allocation behavior of Python before, where all local variables were kept around after an exception, even though I made sure there is no reference anymore to the exception object, to the traceback, etc, and I even called frame.clear() for all frames to really clear it. It turns out, frame.f_locals will create another copy of all the local variables, and the exception object and all the locals in the other frame still stay alive until you access frame.f_locals again. At that point, it will sync the f_locals again with the real (fast) locals, and then it can finally free everything. It was quite annoying to find the source of this problem and to find workarounds for it. https://github.com/python/cpython/issues/113939)

Just wanted to add Austin: Python frame stack sampler for CPython written in pure C (https://github.com/P403n1x87/austin)

If you follow the call stack carefully you should be able to get to the point where sklearn calls ddot_kernel_8 (indirectly in this case). Austin(p) reports source files as well, so that shouldn't be a problem (provided all the debug symbols are available). If you're collecting data with austinp, don't forget to resolve symbol names with the resolve.py utility (https://github.com/P403n1x87/austin/blob/devel/utils/resolve..., see the README for more details: https://github.com/P403n1x87/austin/blob/devel/utils/resolve...)

For CPU cycles, py-spy[0] is getting more and more used. For RAM, I would like to known too...

[0] -- https://github.com/benfred/py-spy

Theres also Py Spy, a profiling tool that can generate flame charts containing a mix of python and C (or C++) calls.

https://github.com/benfred/py-spy

It's worked really well for my needs

You should profile your consumer to check the bottlenecks. You can use the excellent py-spy(written in Rust). IMO a few usage of Numba there and there should solve your performance issues.

So as a first step you'll want to profile your program to figure out where it's slow, and hopefully that'll also tell you why it's slow. I'm the (biased) author of the Sciagraph profiler which is designed for this sort of application (https://sciagraph.com) but you can also try py-spy, which isn't as well designed for data processing/analysis applications (e.g. it won't visualize parallelism at all) but can still be informative (https://github.com/benfred/py-spy). Both are written in Rust ;)

Any advantages/disadvantages compared to py-spy [1]?

[1]: https://github.com/benfred/py-spy

Python profiling is enabled primarily through cprofile, and can be visualized with help of tools like snakeviz (output flame graph can look like this). There are also memory profilers like memray which does in-depth traces, or sampling profilers like py-spy.

A good profiler would be https://github.com/benfred/py-spy . If you run your app/benchmark with it, it should be able to draw a flamegraph telling you where the majority of time is spent. The info here is quite fine grained so it would already tell you where the bottleneck is. Without a full-fledged profiler you can also measure the timings in various parts of the code to understand where the bottleneck is.

Might be worth raising an issue on py-spy (a python profiler written in rust which "supports profiling native python extensions written in languages like C/C++ or Cython" to see if that can close the loop.