Optimize tuple unpacking in skyrl_gym_generator.generate()#138
Optimize tuple unpacking in skyrl_gym_generator.generate()#138tyler-griggs merged 2 commits intoNovaSky-AI:mainfrom davenpi:optimize-generator-tuple-unpacking
Conversation
Replace sum() concatenation with zip() transposition. Reduces execution time by ~98% on large batches (48x speedup). Single iteration instead of 5 separate passes through data.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Summary of Changes
Hello @davenpi, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!
I've submitted a pull request to enhance the performance of the skyrl_gym_generator.py module. The core change involves refactoring the tuple unpacking process within the generate function. Previously, this was handled by multiple inefficient sum() calls, leading to quadratic time complexity for list concatenation. My update replaces this with a single, optimized line utilizing zip(*all_outputs) and map(list, ...), which transposes the data in a single pass. This modification not only simplifies the code but also delivers substantial speed improvements, particularly noticeable with larger data batches.
Highlights
- Performance Optimization: I've optimized the tuple unpacking logic within the
generatemethod ofskyrl_gym_generator.py. - Code Simplification: The previous implementation iterated through
all_outputsfive separate times and usedsum()for list concatenation, which has O(n²) complexity. I've replaced this with a single, more Pythonic line usingmap(list, zip(*all_outputs))to transpose the data efficiently. - Performance Gains: This change yields significant performance improvements, with benchmarks showing a ~5x speedup for small batches and a ~50x speedup for large batches (1000 items), reducing processing time from 2.51ms to 0.05ms.
Using Gemini Code Assist
The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.
Invoking Gemini
You can request assistance from Gemini at any point in your pull request via creating an issue comment (i.e. comment on the pull request page) using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands.
| Feature | Command | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Code Review | /gemini review |
Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state. |
| Pull Request Summary | /gemini summary |
Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state. |
| Comment | @gemini-code-assist | Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in issue comments and review comments. |
| Help | /gemini help |
Displays a list of available commands. |
Customization
To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.
Limitations & Feedback
Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments or fill out our survey to provide feedback.
You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.
Footnotes
-
Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code Review
This pull request provides a great performance optimization by replacing an inefficient tuple unpacking method with a more Pythonic and faster approach using zip. My review focuses on an edge case where the new implementation could fail. I've identified that an empty input list would cause a ValueError and have provided a suggestion to handle this case gracefully, making the implementation more robust.
Co-authored-by: gemini-code-assist[bot] <176961590+gemini-code-assist[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
tyler-griggs
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hi @davenpi , thanks for your interest in SkyRL! I'm glad you've enjoyed using it and have had a chance to start digging into the codebase.
LGTM
Hey! 👋🏾 Love what you're building with SkyRL - the modular architecture makes the system level challenges super clear! I was exploring the codebase and noticed an opportunity to optimize the tuple unpacking in `skyrl_gym_generator.py`. The current implementation iterates through `all_outputs` 5 separate times and uses `sum()` for list concatenation, which has O(n²) complexity. ## What I Changed Replaced the multiple iterations with a single `zip(*all_outputs)` call to transpose the data in one pass. **Before:** ```python responses = sum([[output[0]] for output in all_outputs], []) rewards = sum([[output[1]] for output in all_outputs], []) # ... 3 more similar lines ``` **After:** ```python responses, rewards, stop_reasons, loss_masks, prompt_token_ids = map(list, zip(*all_outputs)) ``` ## Performance Impact I wrote a quick benchmark script and the speedup scales nicely with batch size: - Small batches (10 items): ~5x faster - Large batches (1000 items): ~50x faster (2.51ms → 0.05ms) The optimization maintains identical functionality - just more efficient execution. Happy to discuss any questions! --------- Co-authored-by: gemini-code-assist[bot] <176961590+gemini-code-assist[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Hey! 👋🏾
Love what you're building with SkyRL - the modular architecture makes the system level challenges super clear!
I was exploring the codebase and noticed an opportunity to optimize the tuple unpacking in
skyrl_gym_generator.py. The current implementation iterates throughall_outputs5 separate times and usessum()for list concatenation, which has O(n²) complexity.What I Changed
Replaced the multiple iterations with a single
zip(*all_outputs)call to transpose the data in one pass.Before:
After:
Performance Impact
I wrote a quick benchmark script and the speedup scales nicely with batch size:
The optimization maintains identical functionality - just more efficient execution. Happy to discuss any questions!