-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3.6k
Mamba usage to improve performance (memory & speed) #7239
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
Comments
Hi @SylvainCorlay! Thanks for sharing this. We already did some tests with Mamba and we got some good results (see #6815). We started doing that because we had memory issues with I'm still interested on merging the PR I linked here eventually, since it's under a feature flag and there are some improvements that I'd like to have, but since we don't have the problem anymore I prefer to keep it closed for now to avoid maintaining more code if it's not necessary. |
@humitos FYI MyBinder has switched to mamba, and it appears to be working well so far! |
New micromamba docs: https://github.com/mamba-org/mamba/blob/master/docs/source/micromamba.md |
It may be interesting to experiment with mamba as an alternative to conda to spawn conda environment. Memory consumption and build times should be greatly reduced.
FYI, there was a blog post released about mamba recently, announcing the future plans for the project.
https://medium.com/@QuantStack/open-software-packaging-for-science-61cecee7fc23
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: