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

The test report compare to alpaca-lora. #28

Closed
yezhengmao1 opened this issue Sep 1, 2023 · 4 comments
Closed

The test report compare to alpaca-lora. #28

yezhengmao1 opened this issue Sep 1, 2023 · 4 comments
Assignees
Labels
documentation Improvements or additions to documentation

Comments

@yezhengmao1
Copy link
Collaborator

yezhengmao1 commented Sep 1, 2023

I tested three different datasets with different amounts in alpaca-lora and multi-lora-fine-tune.
Each dataset(the input data's sequence and size are also the same) trains two different lora models with two different optimizers, each optimizer has the same training hyperparams.
So the alpaca-lora needs to be trained twice to produce two different lora model, but multi-lora-fine-tune just need once to produce one lora model.
The experimental statistics on end-to-end train latency (without model and dataset load and save latency).

  • dataset1 use batchsize 7, 457 data from alpaca-lora, and max seq len is 1304
  • dataset2 use batchsize 16, 452 data from alpaca-lora, and max seq len is 512
  • dataset3 use batchsize 16, 5000 data from sql-create-context, and max seq len is 256
    The experimental results are as follows:
  1. Train two different lora total cost time(hours)
    result (手机)
  2. Train two different lora thuoughput(tokens/second)
    result_1 (手机)
@yezhengmao1 yezhengmao1 added the documentation Improvements or additions to documentation label Sep 1, 2023
@merlintang
Copy link
Contributor

how about the gpu memory usage comparison?

@merlintang
Copy link
Contributor

how about the gpu utils information?

@LianxinGao
Copy link
Contributor

LianxinGao commented Sep 3, 2023

Test report about: alpaca_data_en_52k dataset on vicuna-7b-v1.1 (GPU: A100)

Method1: Using the same configuration file and data, fine-tune two datasets simultaneously.
Method2: Using the same configuration file and data, fine-tune only one dataset.

Method1: time cost: 12h45min, gpu memory cost: 23.69GB
Method2: time cost: 6h10min, gpu memory cost: 17.54GB

@yezhengmao1
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Test report about: alpaca_data_en_52k dataset on vicuna-7b-v1.1 (GPU: A100)

Method1: Using the same configuration file and data, fine-tune two datasets simultaneously. Method2: Using the same configuration file and data, fine-tune only one dataset.

Method1: time cost: 12h45min, gpu memory cost: 23.69GB Method2: time cost: 6h10min, gpu memory cost: 17.54GB

Does alpaca-lora and multi-lora-fine-tune set the group_by_length = true? Due to the random group of the dataset, the training time may be different, even in alpaca-lora, the training time varies greatly.

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

No branches or pull requests

3 participants