py-spy VS Poetry

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.

You can manage dependencies in Python with the package manager pip, which comes pre-installed with Python. Pip allows you to install and uninstall Python packages, and it uses a requirements.txt file to keep track of which packages your project depends on. However, pip does not have robust dependency resolution features or isolate dependencies for different projects; this is where tools like pipenv and poetry come in. These tools create a virtual environment for each project, separating the project's dependencies from the system-wide Python environment and other projects.

Poetry provides packaging and dependency management for Python. If you haven't already, install poetry via pip:

Poetry

The Semantify repository provides an example Astro.js project. Ensure you have poetry installed, then build the project from the root of the repository:

Has anyone else been paying attention to how hilariously hard it is to package PyTorch in poetry?

https://github.com/python-poetry/poetry/issues/6409

Based on this comment 5 days ago[0], it's working? I'm not sure didn't dig in too far but based on that comment it seems fair to say that it's not fully Poetry's fault because torch removed hashes (which poetry needs to be effective) for a while only recently adding it back in.

Not sure where I would stand if I fully investigated it tho.

[0] https://github.com/python-poetry/poetry/issues/6409#issuecom...

We will be running this project in Python 3.10 on Mac/Linux, and we will use Poetry to manage our dependencies. Later, we will bundle our app into a container using docker for deployment.

Here are the two main packaging issues I run into, specifically when using Poetry:

1) Lack of support for building extension modules (as mentioned by the article). There is a workaround using an undocumented feature [0], which I've tried, but ultimately decided it was not the right approach. I still use Poetry, but build the extension as a separate step in CI, rather than kludging it into Poetry.

2) Lack of support for offline installs [1], e.g. being able to download the dependencies, copy them to another machine, and perform the install from the downloaded dependencies (similar to using "pip --no-index --find-links=."). Again, you can work around this (by using "poetry export --with-credentials" and "pip download" for fetching the dependencies, then firing up pypiserver [2] to run a local PyPI server on the offline machine), but ideally this would all be a first class feature of Poetry, similar to how it is in pip.

I don't have the capacity to create Pull Requests for addressing these issues with Poetry, and I'm very grateful for the maintainers and those who do contribute. Instead, on the linked issues I share my notes on the matter, in the hope that it may at least help others and potentially get us closer to a solution.

Regardless, I'm sticking with Poetry for now. Though to be fair, the only other Python packaging tools I've used extensively are Pipenv and pip/setuptools. It's time consuming to thoroughly try out these other packaging tools, and is generally lower priority than developing features/fixing bugs, so it's helpful to read about the author's experience with these other tools, such as PDM and Hatch.

[0] https://github.com/python-poetry/poetry/issues/2740

[1] https://github.com/python-poetry/poetry/issues/2184

[2] https://pypi.org/project/pypiserver/

We believe that poetry is currently the best tool for this purpose, besides of being the most popular one at the moment. This is why we will use poetry to manage the dependencies of our project throughout this series of posts. Poetry allows you to declare the libraries your project depends on, and it will manage (install/update) them for you. Poetry also allows you to package your project into a distributable format and publish it to a repository, such as PyPI. We strongly recommend you to learn more about this tool by reading the official documentation.

I started using poetry. The problem is poetry will not install if there is dependency conflict and there is no way to ignore: github