Thanks to visit codestin.com
Credit goes to github.com

Skip to content

[WIP] Releasing the GIL in the inner loop of coordinate descent #2980

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

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

ogrisel
Copy link
Member

@ogrisel ogrisel commented Mar 20, 2014

Here is a first pass at releasing the GIL in our the Coordinate Descent solver for elastic net penalized least squares linear regression models. It seems feasible. What's remained to be done:

  • release the GIL in the dual gap check (need to replace numpy calls by BLAS equivalents)
  • release the GIL in the sparse input variant
  • release the GIL for the precomputed Gram matrix variant
  • benchmark the scaling for instance by hacking the cross_val_score function to make it possible to use the threading backend instead of multiprocessing

I don't plan to work further on this soon, so if someone wants to take over from here, please feel free to do so.

Maybe @manoj-kumar-s you might want to add this to your GSoC proposal if nobody fixes it in the mean time.

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage remained the same when pulling c1498f3 on ogrisel:gil-elasticnet into 096070d on scikit-learn:master.

@MechCoder
Copy link
Member

Hi @ogrisel thanks for the ping. I was out of internet connectivity, so could not respond to your ping on time. I feel my GSoC proposal is already too packed (also the application period is over). I also have my exams till April 7. It would be good to work on this from then probably as a warmup. WDYT?

@ogrisel
Copy link
Member Author

ogrisel commented Mar 24, 2014

As you wish, there is no urgency but it would surely be a good nice to have.

@larsmans
Copy link
Member

Can this be closed in favor of #3102?

@MechCoder
Copy link
Member

ping @ogrisel Can we close this?

@ogrisel
Copy link
Member Author

ogrisel commented May 16, 2014

Closed in favor of #3102

@ogrisel ogrisel closed this May 16, 2014
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants