Download README.md from rich7421/ray-data-gpu-idle-profiles: direct link, hf CLI and curl.
- Browser
- Download file 3.87 kB
-
https://huggingface.co/datasets/rich7421/ray-data-gpu-idle-profiles/resolve/main/README.md
- Command line
-
hf download hf://datasets/rich7421/ray-data-gpu-idle-profiles/README.md
-
curl -L -o README.md https://huggingface.co/datasets/rich7421/ray-data-gpu-idle-profiles/resolve/main/README.md
license: apache-2.0
tags:
- profiling
- ray
- gpu
- nsight-systems
- ray-data
pretty_name: Ray Data GPU Idle Profiles (B200)
Ray Data GPU Idle Profiles (B200)
Nsight Systems profiles (exported to SQLite, readable by
nsys-ai) from an experiment on how a
Ray Data pipeline keeps a GPU idle, and how the loss splits between moving
data and waiting for data. Captured on a single NVIDIA B200 with Ray 2.58.0
/ master, PyTorch 2.14.0+cu130, Nsight Systems 2026.1.3.
These profiles back the write-up in the iThome Ironman series 「GPU 很忙?他真的有在做事嗎?」 (Days 27–29), and are shared so the numbers and the before/after comparison are independently reproducible.
The workload
A deliberately small pipeline so scheduling shows through instead of the model:
ray.data.range → 32 blocks → 2048×8192 FP32 (64 MiB) per batch
→ H2D → 9 matmuls (~39 ms) → D2H; CPU prep ~40 ms per batch
Two knobs move across the files: where data prep runs (inside the GPU UDF vs a separate CPU operator), and whether pinned staging overlaps with compute.
Files
Analysis window is each profile's kernel span on device 0
(CUDA_VISIBLE_DEVICES exposes one physical card, renumbered to 0).
| File | Stage | device idle | copy_ms | note |
|---|---|---|---|---|
inline.sqlite |
prep inside the GPU UDF | 59.0% | — | serial load→compute |
split.sqlite |
prep as a CPU operator | 29.1% | — | H2D 8.5 GB/s pageable |
pinned.sqlite |
naive pin_memory in UDF |
31.4% | — | worse: staging still serial |
overlap.sqlite |
enable_true_multi_threading + per-thread stream |
24.7% | — | 31.3% of H2D overlapped |
patched_split.sqlite |
clean profile after fixing Ray nsight bug | 31.3% | 339.6 | idle split by copy vs wait |
final_split.sqlite |
baseline for the prototype | 62.4% | 830.3 | before pinned-staging |
final_staged.sqlite |
after map_batches pinned-staging prototype | 54.8% | 155.1 | copy_ms −82% |
patched_split.nsys-rep is the raw report for opening in the Nsight Systems GUI.
Code:
workload.py— the four modes (inline / split / pinned / overlap).workload_staged.py— theActorPoolStrategy(pinned_staging=True)prototype run.repro_flush.py— minimal A/B for the nsys teardown-flush race (ray#60904).our_changes.patch— the map_batches pinned-staging prototype (vs Ray masterc8466ab8).cpp_fix_v3.diff— the C++ fix for the teardown-flush race (ray#66129).
Reproduce the analysis
pip install nsys-ai
# the copy_ms field (newer nsys-ai) splits "moving data" out of the idle
nsys-ai skill run gpu_idle_gaps final_split.sqlite -p device=0 --format json
nsys-ai skill run gpu_idle_gaps final_staged.sqlite -p device=0 --format json
Two Ray bugs found while capturing these
Getting a trustworthy profile out of Ray Data first meant fixing two Ray Core bugs, both reduced to minimal repros and reported upstream:
- nsight runtime_env drops the selected Python command (worker never starts): ray#66093 / PR #66094.
- nsys report killed during teardown (empty/missing
.nsys-rep): ray#60904 / PR #66129.
Caveats
Numbers with the profiler on run larger than without it; the paired difference is what matters, not the absolute idle. The box was shared, so wall-time comparisons use the minimum across runs. See the series notes for the full methodology and the "local metric vs mechanism vs end-to-end" distinction.