You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Thanks for a great package for protein-lipid analysis! I would really like to test the binding site identification and binding pose extraction functionality. Unfortunately, I found that the performance is way too slow for me to test this functionality. I have an atomistic system with 1555 residues and a couple 100 lipids, but running the first steps in this tutorial (https://pylipid.readthedocs.io/en/master/tutorials/0-application-walk-through.html, up to "interaction with residues") took 4 mins on my test data (11 frames of protein and lipids), which means this analysis would take 43 days on my whole dataset. For comparison, I previously ran a similar analysis with prolintpy (https://prolint.github.io/prolintpy/#/) which took me ~20 h for the big dataset. Would it be possible to investigate the performance, remove some bottlenecks and perhaps enable multithreading to reduce the runtime?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Thanks for a great package for protein-lipid analysis! I would really like to test the binding site identification and binding pose extraction functionality. Unfortunately, I found that the performance is way too slow for me to test this functionality. I have an atomistic system with 1555 residues and a couple 100 lipids, but running the first steps in this tutorial (https://pylipid.readthedocs.io/en/master/tutorials/0-application-walk-through.html, up to "interaction with residues") took 4 mins on my test data (11 frames of protein and lipids), which means this analysis would take 43 days on my whole dataset. For comparison, I previously ran a similar analysis with prolintpy (https://prolint.github.io/prolintpy/#/) which took me ~20 h for the big dataset. Would it be possible to investigate the performance, remove some bottlenecks and perhaps enable multithreading to reduce the runtime?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: