Skip to content

PERF: (partial) fix for np_datetime.c performance regression #57988

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
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
24 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
74 changes: 32 additions & 42 deletions pandas/_libs/src/vendored/numpy/datetime/np_datetime.c
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -752,66 +752,57 @@ void pandas_timedelta_to_timedeltastruct(npy_timedelta td,
}

const npy_int64 per_day = sec_per_day * per_sec;
npy_int64 frac;
const int sign = td < 0 ? -1 : 1;
// put frac in seconds
if (td < 0 && td % per_sec != 0)
frac = td / per_sec - 1;
else
frac = td / per_sec;
npy_int64 sfrac = td / per_sec;
if (sign < 0) {
if (td % per_sec != 0)
sfrac -= 1;

const int sign = frac < 0 ? -1 : 1;
if (frac < 0) {
// even fraction
if ((-frac % sec_per_day) != 0) {
out->days = -frac / sec_per_day + 1;
frac += sec_per_day * out->days;
if ((-sfrac % sec_per_day) != 0) {
out->days = sfrac / sec_per_day - 1;
sfrac -= sec_per_day * out->days;
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is this exactly the same as before? Previously it looks like out->days would be positive but this is now negative?

Sorry if misreading - again just want to be careful as I'm not sure how well our test cases are hitting all of these branches

} else {
frac = -frac;
if (sfrac <= sec_per_day) {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This seems to add more branching than what we had before, so I'm a little hesitant to say this is faster overall even though it may show up in some of our benchmarks. What kind of difference are you seeing in the current state?

out->days = sfrac / sec_per_day;
sfrac -= out->days * sec_per_day;
}
sfrac = -sfrac;
}
} else if (sfrac >= sec_per_day) {
out->days = sfrac / sec_per_day;
sfrac -= out->days * sec_per_day;
}

if (frac >= sec_per_day) {
out->days += frac / sec_per_day;
frac -= out->days * sec_per_day;
if (sfrac >= sec_per_hour) {
out->hrs = (npy_int32)(sfrac / sec_per_hour);
sfrac %= sec_per_hour;
}

if (frac >= sec_per_hour) {
out->hrs = (npy_int32)(frac / sec_per_hour);
frac -= out->hrs * sec_per_hour;
if (sfrac >= sec_per_min) {
out->min = (npy_int32)(sfrac / sec_per_min);
sfrac %= sec_per_min;
}

if (frac >= sec_per_min) {
out->min = (npy_int32)(frac / sec_per_min);
frac -= out->min * sec_per_min;
if (sfrac >= 0) {
out->sec = (npy_int32)sfrac;
}

if (frac >= 0) {
out->sec = (npy_int32)frac;
frac -= out->sec;
}

if (sign < 0)
out->days = -out->days;

if (base > NPY_FR_s) {
const npy_int64 sfrac =
(out->hrs * sec_per_hour + out->min * sec_per_min + out->sec) *
per_sec;

npy_int64 ifrac = td - (out->days * per_day + sfrac);
// there will be at most 1 billion nanoseconds left here
npy_int32 ifrac = (npy_int32)((td - out->days * per_day) % per_sec);

if (base == NPY_FR_ms) {
out->ms = (npy_int32)ifrac;
out->ms = ifrac;
} else if (base == NPY_FR_us) {
out->ms = (npy_int32)(ifrac / 1000LL);
ifrac = ifrac % 1000LL;
out->us = (npy_int32)ifrac;
out->ms = ifrac / 1000LL;
out->us = ifrac % 1000LL;
} else if (base == NPY_FR_ns) {
out->ms = (npy_int32)(ifrac / (1000LL * 1000LL));
out->ms = ifrac / (1000LL * 1000LL);
ifrac = ifrac % (1000LL * 1000LL);
out->us = (npy_int32)(ifrac / 1000LL);
ifrac = ifrac % 1000LL;
out->ns = (npy_int32)ifrac;
out->us = ifrac / 1000LL;
out->ns = ifrac % 1000LL;
}
}

Expand All @@ -822,7 +813,6 @@ void pandas_timedelta_to_timedeltastruct(npy_timedelta td,
"invalid base unit");
break;
}

out->seconds =
(npy_int32)(out->hrs * sec_per_hour + out->min * sec_per_min + out->sec);
out->microseconds = out->ms * 1000 + out->us;
Expand Down