←back to thread

Llama.cpp 30B runs with only 6GB of RAM now

(github.com)
1311 points msoad | 10 comments | 31 Mar 23 20:37 UTC | HN request time: 0.932s | source | bottom
Show context
jart ◴[31 Mar 23 21:02 UTC] No.35393615[source]▶
Author here. For additional context, please read https://github.com/ggerganov/llama.cpp/discussions/638#discu... The loading time performance has been a huge win for usability, and folks have been having the most wonderful reactions after using this change. But we don't have a compelling enough theory yet to explain the RAM usage miracle. So please don't get too excited just yet! Yes things are getting more awesome, but like all things in science a small amount of healthy skepticism is warranted.
replies(24): >>35393868 #>>35393942 #>>35394089 #>>35394097 #>>35394107 #>>35394203 #>>35394208 #>>35394244 #>>35394259 #>>35394288 #>>35394408 #>>35394881 #>>35395091 #>>35395249 #>>35395858 #>>35395995 #>>35397318 #>>35397499 #>>35398037 #>>35398083 #>>35398427 #>>35402974 #>>35403334 #>>35468946 #
intelVISA ◴[31 Mar 23 22:03 UTC] No.35394288[source]▶
Didn't expect to see two titans today: ggerganov AND jart. Can ya'll slow down you make us mortals look bad :')

Seeing such clever use of mmap makes me dread to imagine how much Python spaghetti probably tanks OpenAI's and other "big ML" shops' infra when they should've trusted in zero copy solutions.

Perhaps SWE is dead after all, but LLMs didn't kill it...

replies(11): >>35395112 #>>35395145 #>>35395165 #>>35395404 #>>35396298 #>>35397484 #>>35398972 #>>35399367 #>>35400001 #>>35400090 #>>35456064 #
gct ◴[01 Apr 23 02:04 UTC] No.35396298[source]▶
This doesn't even seem that clever, just regular ol' use of mmap where there was none before. Wonder what other performance is being left on the floor. I'm convinced entire power plants could be retired if the world stopped using python unfortunately.
replies(1): >>35396471 #
ChatPGT ◴[01 Apr 23 02:35 UTC] No.35396471[source]▶
>> I'm convinced entire power plants could be retired if the world stopped using python unfortunately.

On the other hand, many business and professionals wouldn't exist :)

replies(1): >>35396778 #
sn_master ◴[01 Apr 23 03:23 UTC] No.35396778[source]▶
I can't find a single good argument for Python based on merit that's not at least 15+ years dated and stems from "But Google is using it".

It's not the easiest syntax, not the best compiler support, performance and threading is a joke. The entire language is based on hype back from the time when the only two mainstream languages were C++ and Java.

replies(7): >>35397047 #>>35397059 #>>35397110 #>>35397339 #>>35397398 #>>35397582 #>>35398349 #
alanfranz ◴[01 Apr 23 06:04 UTC] No.35397582[source]▶
Python is the 2nd best language for everything.

It doesn’t excel at anything, but anything a software can do, it can be done in Python somehow.

So, a great pick when you’ve got no idea where you’re going to, when you’re prototyping, when you don’t care about performance or perfection.

I agree that for large scale systems when you already know what you’re doing, Python shows its limits quite soon (and we should add the problems with missing/slow type checking that slows down large scale systems development).

replies(3): >>35397835 #>>35399566 #>>35399581 #
pharmakom ◴[01 Apr 23 06:49 UTC] No.35397835[source]▶
> Python is the 2nd best language for everything.

Huh? Why?

You can barely deploy it to Web.

it doesn't scale perfoance wise

you can't built robust abstractions

The REPL is merely OK

You can barely ship working code without containers

the syntax is hard to manipulate programmatically

Python has inertia but it's holding us back

replies(3): >>35398468 #>>35398487 #>>35399387 #
alanfranz ◴[01 Apr 23 11:31 UTC] No.35399387[source]▶
What is another language working that well in a larger number of areas?
replies(1): >>35399619 #
1. pharmakom ◴[01 Apr 23 12:13 UTC] No.35399619[source]▶
Clojure

JavaScript

Typescript

OCaml

Haskell

F#

replies(3): >>35401049 #>>35401969 #>>35433667 #
2. alanfranz ◴[01 Apr 23 15:31 UTC] No.35401049[source]▶
Any JVM language or .NET language will take more to interface with native libraries, it’s not the same.

Ocaml is very niche, I feel it’s an hard sell for a general purpose language. Haskell, 3x that.

JS and TS, could be. But are they so much better than Python, if better at all?

replies(2): >>35402387 #>>35416211 #
3. xxpor ◴[01 Apr 23 17:10 UTC] No.35401969[source]▶
Outside of typescript, this feels like a response from a decade ago, when Python was still mired in the 2 vs 3 problem.

What's happened to the popularity of all of these languages since 2010? Outside of JS/TS, absolutely nothing. If anything, they've lost mindshare.

4. revelio ◴[01 Apr 23 17:57 UTC] No.35402387[source]▶
Native library interfacing isn't really Python's strong suit, interpreter plugins are quite painful to write.

.NET has P/Invoke which is much nicer.

JVM is getting Panama+jextract, which is the nicest yet. You can go straight from header files to pure Java bindings which don't need any extra native code at all. But it's not shipped yet :(

replies(2): >>35403179 #>>35405781 #
5. baq ◴[01 Apr 23 19:18 UTC] No.35403179{3}[source]▶
Python has had cffi since figuratively forever, so I’m not sure why you compare native modules to P/Invoke?
replies(1): >>35408954 #
6. alanfranz ◴[02 Apr 23 00:36 UTC] No.35405781{3}[source]▶
What is an “interpreter plugin?” Writing a Python C extension is not that painful, it’s quite well supported. And you’ve got cffi and ctypes as well.
7. revelio ◴[02 Apr 23 10:05 UTC] No.35408954{4}[source]▶
Most important libraries with native components are using C extensions, not cffi.
8. nequo ◴[02 Apr 23 22:58 UTC] No.35416211[source]▶
> Ocaml is very niche, I feel it’s an hard sell for a general purpose language. Haskell, 3x that.

The impression about Haskell’s nicheness compared with OCaml prevails. But Haskell has a larger userbase and a larger library ecosystem than OCaml.

replies(1): >>35479230 #
9. chpatrick ◴[04 Apr 23 01:08 UTC] No.35433667[source]▶
I've been using Haskell professionally for 8 years and its ecosystem is laughable compared to Python.
10. alanfranz ◴[07 Apr 23 07:47 UTC] No.35479230{3}[source]▶
A few years have passed since I last tried out both languages. Ocaml was sort of approachable, while Haskell required quite a different mindset imho, hence the “nicheness” from the general usage standpoint.