On 6/30/22 17:45, Barbara Lerner wrote:
Thanks for these suggestions.? I attempted to submit a slightly earlier version of my package a few weeks ago and saw the slowdown on winbuilder then, too.? I did not look into any further at that point.
I was curious about repeatability to rule out the option that it was simply that Winbuilder was overloaded at the time of checking the package. Is the current version that also caused the problem available anywhere?
I have tested it on a local Windows computer running 4.2.0 and I did not see the slowdown there.? Here are those results: Name ????????user?? ?system elapsed prov.json 1.11 ??0.24 2.19 prov.run??? 0.99? ??0.06 1.93 version? R version 4.2.0 (2022-04-22 ucrt) os?????? Windows 10 x64 (build 19044) system?? x86_64, mingw32
It would be difficult to profile without being able to reproduce on a machine that can be used interactively and exclusively for the profiling. Still, you could try narrowing it down by instrumenting the package - adding some timings, printing the outputs, and sending such instrumented package to Winbuilder Tomas
Tomas Kalibera wrote on 6/30/22 10:09 AM:
On 6/29/22 22:25, Barbara Lerner wrote:
I have a package that I want to submit an updated version for but the examples run too slowly on win-builder since 4.2 came out.? I just submitted the exact same tar.gz file to all 3 versions of R available on win-builder and got the results shown below.? Notice the dramatic slowdown from 4.1.3 to 4.2.1. I don't know how to go about tracking down the cause of this slowdown. The examples are quite small.? I am reluctant to use \dontrun, but I am not sure what else to do.
Could you perhaps submit to Winbuilder several times (with some non-trivial delay between the runs) to see if the very long execution is reproducible? If so, the next step could be trying on a Windows machine with interactive access, to reproduce, and if it is still so slow, checking where the time is spent, using an R profiler, using some C profiler (e.g. VerySleepy is free), comparing possibly to 4.1.3. It might be useful or necessary to also do the profiling with a debug build of Windows and/or the package, while the performance numbers will be skewed, one would see the symbol names. If you wanted specific help, please send a reproducible example - instructions how to run the code and which code. Best Tomas
June 29 2:33 PM? - old release * using R version 4.1.3 (2022-03-10) i386 timings name??? user??? system??? elapsed prov.json??? 3.28??? 0.33??? 5.19 prov.run??? 2.70??? 0.27??? 4.18 x64 timings name??? user??? system??? elapsed prov.json??? 3.51??? 0.27??? 4.93 prov.run??? 3.05??? 0.28??? 4.48 June 29 2:19 PM? - release * using R version 4.2.1 (2022-06-23 ucrt) * using platform: x86_64-w64-mingw32 (64-bit) name??? user??? system??? elapsed prov.json??? 16.98??? 8.81??? 26.82 prov.run??? 3.53??? 0.42??? 4.89 June 29? 1:52 PM - devel * using R Under development (unstable) (2022-06-28 r82534 ucrt) * using platform: x86_64-w64-mingw32 (64-bit) name??? user??? system??? elapsed prov.json??? 16.60???? 9.09??? 26.66 prov.run??? 3.57??? 0.22??? 4.70 I then ran the same timing script as win-builder uses on my Mac, using Rscript and got these results: name??? user??? system elapsed prov.json?????? 1.105?? 0.159?? 1.329 prov.run??????? 0.890 0.103 1.053 session_info reports: ?version? R version 4.2.0 (2022-04-22) ? ?os?????? macOS Catalina 10.15.7 ?system?? x86_64, darwin17.0 I then installed 4.2.1 on my Mac. The time is a little slower but nothing like the slowdown on Windows. name??? user??? system? elapsed prov.json?????? 1.286 0.230?? 3.080 prov.run??????? 0.940?? 0.108?? 1.131 ?version? R version 4.2.1 (2022-06-23) ?os?????? macOS Catalina 10.15.7 ?system x86_64, darwin17.0
-- <http://www.getpostbox.com>Barbara Lerner (she / her) Professor Computer Science Department Mount Holyoke College <http://www.getpostbox.com>