I am using the pandas vectorized str.split() method to extract the first element returned from a split on “~”. I also have also tried using df.apply() with a lambda and str.split() to produce equivalent results. When using %timeit, I’m finding that df.apply() is performing faster than the vectorized version.
Everything that I have read about vectorization seems to indicate that the first version should have better performance. Can someone please explain why I am getting these results? Example:
id facility
0 3466 abc~24353
1 4853 facility1~3.4.5.6
2 4582 53434_Facility~34432~cde
3 9972 facility2~FACILITY2~343
4 2356 Test~23 ~FAC1
The above dataframe has about 500,000 rows and I have also tested at around 1 million with similar results. Here is some example input and output:
Vectorization
In [1]: %timeit df['facility'] = df['facility'].str.split('~').str[0]
1.1 s ± 54.4 ms per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 1 loop each)
Lambda Apply
In [2]: %timeit df['facility'] = df['facility'].astype(str).apply(lambda s: s.split('~')[0])
650 ms ± 52.1 ms per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 1 loop each)
Does anyone know why I am getting this behavior?
4
Pandas string methods are only “vectorized” in the sense that you don’t have to write the loop yourself. There isn’t actually any parallelization going on, because string (especially regex problems) are inherently difficult (impossible?) to parallelize. If you really want speed, you actually should fall back to python here.
%timeit df['facility'].str.split('~', n=1).str[0]
%timeit [x.split('~', 1)[0] for x in df['facility'].tolist()]
411 ms ± 10.2 ms per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 1 loop each)
132 ms ± 302 µs per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 10 loops each)
For more information on when loops are faster than pandas functions, take a look at For loops with pandas – When should I care?.
As for why apply is faster, I’m of the belief that the function apply is applying (i.e., str.split) is a lot more lightweight than the string splitting happening in the bowels of Series.str.split.
0