Faster axis autorange relayout #2546

Activity

1. etpinard

   added

   type: performance

   on Apr 11, 2018
2. etpinard commented on Jul 16, 2018

   

   etpinard

   on Jul 16, 2018

   Last edited by etpinard

   ContributorAuthor

   More actions

   Swapping editType: 'calc' for editType: 'plot' in the axis autorange declaration went almost too smoothly. Just one test was falling (apart from tests checking for undefined ax._min and ax._max) :

   plotly.js/test/jasmine/tests/click_test.js

   Lines 754 to 789 in 0de19be

   	it('when set to \'reset+autorange\' (the default) should follow updated auto ranges', function(done) {
   	var updateData = {
   	x: [[1e-4, 0, 1e3]],
   	y: [[30, 0, 30]]
   	};
   	var newAutoRangeX = [-4.482371794871794, 3.4823717948717943],
   	newAutoRangeY = [-0.8892256657741471, 1.6689872212461876];
   	Plotly.plot(gd, mockCopy.data, mockCopy.layout).then(function() {
   	expect(gd.layout.xaxis.range).toBeCloseToArray(autoRangeX);
   	expect(gd.layout.yaxis.range).toBeCloseToArray(autoRangeY);
   	return Plotly.relayout(gd, update);
   	}).then(function() {
   	expect(gd.layout.xaxis.range).toBeCloseToArray(zoomRangeX);
   	expect(gd.layout.yaxis.range).toBeCloseToArray(zoomRangeY);
   	return Plotly.restyle(gd, updateData);
   	}).then(function() {
   	expect(gd.layout.xaxis.range).toBeCloseToArray(zoomRangeX);
   	expect(gd.layout.yaxis.range).toBeCloseToArray(zoomRangeY);
   	return doubleClick(blankPos[0], blankPos[1]);
   	}).then(function() {
   	expect(gd.layout.xaxis.range).toBeCloseToArray(newAutoRangeX);
   	expect(gd.layout.yaxis.range).toBeCloseToArray(newAutoRangeY);
   	return doubleClick(blankPos[0], blankPos[1]);
   	}).then(function() {
   	expect(gd.layout.xaxis.range).toBeCloseToArray(newAutoRangeX);
   	expect(gd.layout.yaxis.range).toBeCloseToArray(newAutoRangeY);
   	done();
   	});
   	});

   By this old little test was enough to highlight a pretty important problem with this approach and 'calcIfAutorange' edits - which has the name suggests leads to a calc edit pathway if one or more axis has autorange: true.

   For example, scatter marker.size is a 'calcIfAutorange' attribute as it can expand the axis ranges. So consider,

   Plotly.newPlot(gd, [{
     y: [1, 2, 1] 
   }], {
     xaxis: {range: [0, 2]},
     yaxis: {range: [0, 2]}
   })
   
   // then
   Plotly.restyle(gd, 'marker.size', 30)
   
   // then
   Plotly.relayout(gd, {
     'xaxis.autorange': true,
     'yaxis.autorange': true
   })
   
   // then 
   gd.layout.xaxis.range
   // (on master) => [-0.18848653667595172, 2.188486536675952]
   // (with editType: 'plot' autorange) => [0, 2]
   //  i.e.  the autorange change doesn't get picked up!

   There are a few ways to solve the problem:

   1. 🔪 the 'calcIfAutorange' edit type and replace it with 'calc'. This solution is easy to implement, but leads to slower update pathways.
   2. replace 'calcIfAutorange' with something like 'axexpand+plot', that only updates ax._min / ax._max accordingly as opposed to going through the entire calc pathway.
   3. something to 2) but with per-trace update as proposed in the issue description above

   Personally, I think speeding up double-click and legend visible trace toggling is more important than keeping marker.size edits and the few other 'calcIfAutorange' attributes (mostly in annotations and shapes) updating fast when the range is set. If some of you disagree, please let me know.
3. etpinard commented on Jul 16, 2018

   

   etpinard

   on Jul 16, 2018

   ContributorAuthor

   More actions

   Oh and here are some benchmarks for Axes.expand (with autorange: true):

   Scatter at 1e4 pts:

   array marker.size	time [ms]	% of total render time
   yes	20	< 1%
   no	2-5	< 1%

   Scattergl at 1e5-1 pts (the worse case before the "mean(marker.size)" approximation):

   array marker.size	time [ms]	% of total render time
   yes	60 - 80	~10%
   no	5	< 1%

   Scattergl at 1e6 pts:

   array marker.size	time [ms]	% of total render time
   yes	~10	< 1%
   no	~10	< 1%

   ---

   All in all, I think skipping Axes.expand during calc when axis ranges are set is an unnecessary optimization.
4. etpinard

   closed this as completedin #2823on Aug 2, 2018