Skip to content
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

EDTA_raw.pl run with -type tir is glitchy #135

Closed
sanyalab opened this issue Nov 27, 2020 · 2 comments
Closed

EDTA_raw.pl run with -type tir is glitchy #135

sanyalab opened this issue Nov 27, 2020 · 2 comments

Comments

@sanyalab
Copy link

Hi Shujun,

I find that when the EDTA_raw.pl is run with the -type tir, the success of the run is erratic. Recently I ran the script with the following Resource specifications.
1) First Run
Memory: 70000
CPUs: 36
Chromosomes in genome: 20
Genome Size: 2.8G
Result: Success

2) Second Run
Memory: 70000
CPUs: 36
Scaffolds in Genome: 894
Genome Size: 2.8G
Result: Fail, Insufficient memory

It seems to me that the assembly quality plays a big role in the success of failure of the TIR module. I do not face this with LTR or Helitron predictions. Is it possible that the genome gets loaded 36 times, therefore the memory overshoots? Probably if I ran with 16 processors, the time required would increase but the memory will be under check

Thanks
Abhijit

@oushujun
Copy link
Owner

oushujun commented Dec 1, 2020

Hi Abhijit,

Nice benchmark! This was observed before, that small scaffolds will significantly increase memory usage, but finally, there is a comparable benchmark.

The three components were written in different programming languages by different authors: LTR - Perl; Helitron - Java; TIR - Python. I am not very familiar with Python, but I suspect it's CPU and memory management is not as efficient as others. You may check the code of TIR-Learner and let me know if you pinpoint the issue.

Best,
Shujun

@oushujun
Copy link
Owner

#175 provides some workarounds.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants