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

NeighborSampler samples different nodes with disjoint=True and False #9375

Open
Barcavin opened this issue May 30, 2024 · 5 comments
Open

NeighborSampler samples different nodes with disjoint=True and False #9375

Barcavin opened this issue May 30, 2024 · 5 comments
Labels

Comments

@Barcavin
Copy link
Contributor

Barcavin commented May 30, 2024

🐛 Describe the bug

import argparse

from torch_geometric.datasets import FakeDataset, FakeHeteroDataset
from torch_geometric.loader import NeighborLoader
from torch_geometric.seed import seed_everything

parser = argparse.ArgumentParser()
parser.add_argument('--disjoint', type=int, default=0)
args = parser.parse_args()
seed_everything(0)

data = FakeHeteroDataset(1, avg_degree=600)[0]

print(data['v0'].x.mean())
loader = NeighborLoader(
            data,
            # Sample 30 neighbors for each node for 2 iterations
            num_neighbors=[30] * 2,
            # Use a batch size of 128 for sampling training nodes
            batch_size=128,
            input_nodes=('v0',[1]),
            disjoint=args.disjoint,
)
print(next(iter(loader))['v0'].n_id.unique().sum())

Run in the terminal:

python disjoint.py --disjoint=1

tensor(-0.0022)
tensor(72436)
python disjoint.py --disjoint=0

tensor(-0.0022)
tensor(71816)

On the same datasets, it will sample two different node sets. I only see this happens on heterogeneous data but not on homogeneous data.

Versions

PyTorch version: 2.0.1
Is debug build: False
CUDA used to build PyTorch: 11.8
ROCM used to build PyTorch: N/A

OS: Ubuntu 22.04.3 LTS (x86_64)
GCC version: (Ubuntu 11.4.0-1ubuntu1~22.04) 11.4.0
Clang version: Could not collect
CMake version: Could not collect
Libc version: glibc-2.35

Python version: 3.11.9 | packaged by conda-forge | (main, Apr 19 2024, 18:36:13) [GCC 12.3.0] (64-bit runtime)
Python platform: Linux-4.14.343-260.564.amzn2.x86_64-x86_64-with-glibc2.35
Is CUDA available: True
CUDA runtime version: Could not collect
CUDA_MODULE_LOADING set to: LAZY
GPU models and configuration: GPU 0: NVIDIA A10G
Nvidia driver version: 535.129.03
cuDNN version: Could not collect
HIP runtime version: N/A
MIOpen runtime version: N/A
Is XNNPACK available: True

CPU:
Architecture: x86_64
CPU op-mode(s): 32-bit, 64-bit
Address sizes: 48 bits physical, 48 bits virtual
Byte Order: Little Endian
CPU(s): 32
On-line CPU(s) list: 0-31
Vendor ID: AuthenticAMD
Model name: AMD EPYC 7R32
CPU family: 23
Model: 49
Thread(s) per core: 2
Core(s) per socket: 16
Socket(s): 1
Stepping: 0
BogoMIPS: 5599.99
Flags: fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush mmx fxsr sse sse2 ht syscall nx mmxext fxsr_opt pdpe1gb rdtscp lm constant_tsc rep_good nopl xtopology nonstop_tsc cpuid extd_apicid aperfmperf tsc_known_freq pni pclmulqdq ssse3 fma cx16 sse4_1 sse4_2 movbe popcnt aes xsave avx f16c rdrand hypervisor lahf_lm cmp_legacy cr8_legacy abm sse4a misalignsse 3dnowprefetch topoext ssbd ibrs ibpb stibp vmmcall fsgsbase bmi1 avx2 smep bmi2 rdseed adx smap clflushopt clwb sha_ni xsaveopt xsavec xgetbv1 clzero xsaveerptr arat npt nrip_save rdpid
Hypervisor vendor: KVM
Virtualization type: full
L1d cache: 512 KiB (16 instances)
L1i cache: 512 KiB (16 instances)
L2 cache: 8 MiB (16 instances)
L3 cache: 64 MiB (4 instances)
NUMA node(s): 1
NUMA node0 CPU(s): 0-31
Vulnerability Gather data sampling: Not affected
Vulnerability Itlb multihit: Not affected
Vulnerability L1tf: Not affected
Vulnerability Mds: Not affected
Vulnerability Meltdown: Not affected
Vulnerability Mmio stale data: Not affected
Vulnerability Retbleed: Vulnerable, RAS-Poisoning: Vulnerable
Vulnerability Spec store bypass: Mitigation; Speculative Store Bypass disabled via prctl and seccomp
Vulnerability Spectre v1: Mitigation; usercopy/swapgs barriers and __user pointer sanitization
Vulnerability Spectre v2: Mitigation; Retpolines, IBPB conditional, IBRS_FW, STIBP conditional, RSB filling, PBRSB-eIBRS Not affected
Vulnerability Srbds: Not affected
Vulnerability Tsx async abort: Not affected

Versions of relevant libraries:
[pip3] numpy==1.26.4
[pip3] pytorch_frame==0.2.2
[pip3] torch==2.0.1
[pip3] torch_geometric==2.5.2
[pip3] torch-hd==5.5.0
[pip3] torch-scatter==2.1.2
[pip3] torch-sparse==0.6.18
[pip3] torchaudio==2.0.2
[pip3] torchvision==0.15.2
[pip3] triton==2.0.0
[conda] blas 2.121 mkl conda-forge
[conda] blas-devel 3.9.0 21_linux64_mkl conda-forge
[conda] ffmpeg 4.3 hf484d3e_0 pytorch
[conda] libblas 3.9.0 21_linux64_mkl conda-forge
[conda] libcblas 3.9.0 21_linux64_mkl conda-forge
[conda] liblapack 3.9.0 21_linux64_mkl conda-forge
[conda] liblapacke 3.9.0 21_linux64_mkl conda-forge
[conda] mkl 2024.0.0 ha957f24_49657 conda-forge
[conda] mkl-devel 2024.0.0 ha770c72_49657 conda-forge
[conda] mkl-include 2024.0.0 ha957f24_49657 conda-forge
[conda] numpy 1.26.4 py311h64a7726_0 conda-forge
[conda] pyg 2.5.2 py311_torch_2.0.0_cu118 pyg
[conda] pytorch 2.0.1 py3.11_cuda11.8_cudnn8.7.0_0 pytorch
[conda] pytorch-cuda 11.8 h7e8668a_5 pytorch
[conda] pytorch-frame 0.2.2 pypi_0 pypi
[conda] pytorch-mutex 1.0 cuda pytorch
[conda] pytorch-scatter 2.1.2 py311_torch_2.0.0_cu118 pyg
[conda] pytorch-sparse 0.6.18 py311_torch_2.0.0_cu118 pyg
[conda] torch-hd 5.5.0 pypi_0 pypi
[conda] torchaudio 2.0.2 py311_cu118 pytorch
[conda] torchtriton 2.0.0 py311 pytorch
[conda] torchvision 0.15.2 py311_cu118 pytorch

@Barcavin Barcavin added the bug label May 30, 2024
@rusty1s
Copy link
Member

rusty1s commented Jun 5, 2024

I would say that is expected. Although you fix the random seed, sampling is performed differently for disjoint=True/False. You can see that the same number of nodes are sampled if you change to num_neighbors=[-1] * 2.

@Barcavin
Copy link
Contributor Author

Barcavin commented Jun 5, 2024

Thanks for your reply. However, the sampling seems to be more consistent on homogeneous data. Is that also expected somehow on heterogeneous data?

@rusty1s
Copy link
Member

rusty1s commented Jun 6, 2024

What do you mean by "more consistent"?

@Barcavin
Copy link
Contributor Author

Barcavin commented Jun 6, 2024

If we sample on homogeneous graph, the sampled data for either disjoint=True or False will be the same.

To reproduce, running python disjoint.py --disjoint=0 --heter=0 and python disjoint.py --disjoint=1 --heter=0 will give the same result.

disjoint.py:

import argparse

from torch_geometric.datasets import FakeDataset, FakeHeteroDataset
from torch_geometric.loader import NeighborLoader
from torch_geometric.seed import seed_everything

parser = argparse.ArgumentParser()
parser.add_argument('--disjoint', type=int, default=0)
parser.add_argument('--heter', type=int, default=1)
args = parser.parse_args()
seed_everything(0)

if args.heter:
    data = FakeHeteroDataset(1, avg_degree=600)[0]

    print(data['v0'].x.mean())
    loader = NeighborLoader(
                data,
                # Sample 30 neighbors for each node for 2 iterations
                num_neighbors=[30] * 2,
                # Use a batch size of 128 for sampling training nodes
                batch_size=128,
                input_nodes=('v0',[1]),
                disjoint=args.disjoint,
    )
    print(next(iter(loader))['v0'].n_id.unique().sum())
else:
    data = FakeDataset(1, avg_degree=600)[0]

    print(data.x.mean())
    loader = NeighborLoader(
                data,
                # Sample 30 neighbors for each node for 2 iterations
                num_neighbors=[30] * 2,
                # Use a batch size of 128 for sampling training nodes
                batch_size=128,
                input_nodes=[1],
                disjoint=args.disjoint,
    )
    print(next(iter(loader)).n_id.unique().sum())

@rusty1s
Copy link
Member

rusty1s commented Jun 14, 2024

Thanks. I don't necessarily think this is a problem, but I will try to find some time to look into why this is the case.

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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants