Skip to content

reindex doesn't preserve chunks #2745

Closed

Description

@davidbrochart

The following code creates a small (100x100) chunked DataArray, and then re-indexes it into a huge one (100000x100000):

import xarray as xr
import numpy as np

n = 100
x = np.arange(n)
y = np.arange(n)
da = xr.DataArray(np.zeros(n*n).reshape(n, n), coords=[x, y], dims=['x', 'y']).chunk(n, n)

n2 = 100000
x2 = np.arange(n2)
y2 = np.arange(n2)
da2 = da.reindex({'x': x2, 'y': y2})
da2

But the re-indexed DataArray has chunksize=(100000, 100000) instead of chunksize=(100, 100):

<xarray.DataArray (x: 100000, y: 100000)>
dask.array<shape=(100000, 100000), dtype=float64, chunksize=(100000, 100000)>
Coordinates:
  * x        (x) int64 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 99994 99995 99996 99997 99998 99999
  * y        (y) int64 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 99994 99995 99996 99997 99998 99999

Which immediately leads to a memory error when trying to e.g. store it to a zarr archive:

ds2 = da2.to_dataset(name='foo')
ds2.to_zarr(store='foo', mode='w')

Trying to re-chunk to 100x100 before storing it doesn't help, but this time it takes a lot more time before crashing with a memory error:

da3 = da2.chunk(n, n)
ds3 = da3.to_dataset(name='foo')
ds3.to_zarr(store='foo', mode='w')

Activity

  1. shoyer commented on Feb 5, 2019

    @shoyer
    Member

    To understand what's going on here, it may be helpful to look at what's going on inside dask:

    In [16]: x = np.arange(5)
    
    In [17]: da = xr.DataArray(np.ones(5), coords=[('x', x)]).chunk(-1)
    
    In [18]: da
    Out[18]:
    <xarray.DataArray (x: 5)>
    dask.array<shape=(5,), dtype=float64, chunksize=(5,)>
    Coordinates:
      * x        (x) int64 0 1 2 3 4
    
    In [19]: da.reindex({'x': np.arange(20)})
    Out[19]:
    <xarray.DataArray (x: 20)>
    dask.array<shape=(20,), dtype=float64, chunksize=(20,)>
    Coordinates:
      * x        (x) int64 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
    
    In [20]: da.reindex({'x': np.arange(20)}).data.dask
    Out[20]: <dask.sharedict.ShareDict at 0x3201d72e8>
    
    In [21]: dict(da.reindex({'x': np.arange(20)}).data.dask)
    Out[21]:
    {('where-8e0018fae0773d202c09fde132189347', 0): (subgraph_callable,
      ('eq-8167293bb8136be2934a8bf111095d8f', 0),
      array(nan),
      ('getitem-0eab360ba0dee5a5c3fbded0fdfd70e3', 0)),
     ('eq-8167293bb8136be2934a8bf111095d8f', 0): (subgraph_callable,
      ('array-5ddc8bae2e6cf87c0bac846c6da4d27f', 0),
      -1),
     ('array-5ddc8bae2e6cf87c0bac846c6da4d27f',
      0): array([ 0,  1,  2,  3,  4, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1, -1,
            -1, -1, -1]),
     ('xarray-<this-array>-765734894ab8f05a57335ea1064da549',
      0): (<function dask.array.core.getter(a, b, asarray=True, lock=None)>, 'xarray-<this-array>-765734894ab8f05a57335ea1064da549', (slice(0, 5, None),)),
     'xarray-<this-array>-765734894ab8f05a57335ea1064da549': ImplicitToExplicitIndexingAdapter(array=NumpyIndexingAdapter(array=array([1., 1., 1., 1., 1.]))),
     ('getitem-0eab360ba0dee5a5c3fbded0fdfd70e3',
      0): (<function _operator.getitem(a, b, /)>, ('xarray-<this-array>-765734894ab8f05a57335ea1064da549',
       0), (array([0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4]),))}
    

    Xarary isn't controlling chunk sizes directly, but it's turns reindex({'x': x2}) into an indexing operation like data[np.array([0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4])] under the covers, with the last element repeated -- in your case 100000 times. See xarray.Variable._getitem_with_mask for the implementation on the xarray side.

    The alternative design would be to append an array of all NaNs along one axis, but on average I think the current implementation is faster and results in more contiguous chunks -- it's quite common to intersperse missing indices with reindex() and alternating indexed/missing values can result in tiny chunks. Even then I think you would probably run into performance issues -- I don't think dask.array.full() uses a default chunk size.

    We could also conceivably put some heuristics to control chunking for this in xarray, but I'd rather do it upstream in dask.array, if possible (xarray tries to avoid thinking about chunks).

  2. phofl commented on Aug 14, 2024

    @phofl
    Contributor

    This was fixed with the latest Dask release 🥳

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions