Consider I have 3 co-ordinate systems eg: A, B and X
I am currently try to do lookup_transform between two frames eg: Source as A and Destination as B.
In /tf topic I have the transforms of A -> X and X ->B. I wanted to know what timestamp does the lookup_transform provide for the resultant transformation when I do a transformation from A -> B
For example:
If A -> X timestamp is T ns and X -> B timestamp is T + 1 ns, what will be the resultant timestamp of transform A -> B
When I did some tests, I found that the resultant timestamp for A -> B is either of A -> X or X -> B , But I do not know how lookup_transform decides upon the timestamps for the result.
For my use case I always want to have the timestamp of A -> X in the resultant value
I use the tf function for lookup of latest transfórm (Time(0))
Lookup_Transform function
The tf2 saves your transformations in a graph updating the edges of this graph whenever the tf_listener receives a new message from the tf_broadcaster. When queried, the listener performs interpolation between the nearest values since you are using Time(0) it will be the latest 2 values. And for the time stamps it will return the latest common time across the queried values.
So in your example the time will be the latest common time A -> X and X -> B existed.
For more information you can read this paper
Related
I'm trying to parse a very long file by using a fixed-size sliding window over it. For each such window I'd like to either insert it to a HashMap as the key with custom struct as value, or modify existing value for the window. My main problem is memory usage, since it should scale into very large quantities (up to several billions of distinct windows) and I want to reuse existing keys.
I would like to append windows (or more specifically bytes) to a vector and use the index as a key in the HashMap, but use the window under index for hash computation and key comparison. Because windows are overlapping, I will append only the part of the window which is new (if I have an input AAAB and size 3 I would have 2 windows: AAA and AAB, but would only store 4 bytes - AAAB; windows would have indices 0 and 1 respectively), which is the reason behind not keying the HM with window itself.
Here's the simplified pseudo-code, in which I omitted the minimal-input problem:
let file = // content of the file on which i can call windows()
let vec = Rc::new(RefCell::new(Vec::new())); // RefCell allows me to store Rc in the hashmap while mutating the underlying vector
let hm: HashMap<KeyStruct, ValueStruct> = HashMap::new();
for i in file.windows(FIXED_SIZE) {
let idx = vec.len();
vec.borrow_mut().push(i);
if hm.contains_key(KeyStruct::new(idx)) {
// get the key associated with i
// modify the value associated with i
// do something with the key
vec.borrow_mut().pop(); // window is already in the vector
}
else {
hm.insert(KeyStruct::new(idx), ValueStruct::new(...));
}
}
I have came up with 2 different approaches: either modifying the existing HashMap implementation so that it works as intended, or using a custom struct as key to the HashMap. Since I would only use one vector in order to store windows, I could store a Rc to it in the HashMap and then use that for lookups.
I could also create a struct which would hold both a Rc and index, using it as a key to the HashMap. The latter solution works with a vanilla HashMap, but stores a lot of redundant Rcs to the same vector. I also thought about storing a static pointer to Rc and then get Rc in unsafe blocks, but I would have to guarantee that the position of the Rc on the stack never changes and I'm not sure if I can guarantee that.
I tried to implement the first approach (custom HashMap), but it turns out that Buckets use a lot of features which are gated, and I can't compile the project using the stable compiler.
What's even worse is that I would like to get the key that is already in the HashMap on a successful lookup (because different indices can store the same window, for which the hash/cmp would be identical) and use it inside the value structure. I couldn't find a way to do this using the provided API for HashMap - the closest I get is by using entry(), which can contain an OccupiedEntry, but it doesn't have any way to retrieve the key, and there's no way to get it by unsafe memory lookups, because documentation on repr() says that the order in structs is not guaranteed in the default representation. I can store the key (or only the index) in the value struct, but that adds yet another size_of::<usize>() bytes per entry, only to store the index/key in a reachable manner, which is kept with that entry either way.
My questions are:
Is it possible to compile/reuse parts of std::collections which are not pub, such that I could modify few methods of HashMap and compile the whole project?
Is there any way of getting the key after successful lookup in the HashMap? (I even found out that libs team decided against implementing method over Entry which would allow me to get the key...)
Can you see any alternative to solutions that I mentioned?
EDIT
To clarify the problem let's consider a simple example - input ABABCBACBC and window size of 2. We should give index as a key to the HashMap, and it should get the window-size number of bytes as window starting from that index: with vector [A, A, C], index 1 and window-size 2 HashMap should try to find a hash/key for AC.
We get windows like this:
AB -> BA -> AB -> BC -> CB -> BA -> AC -> CB -> BC
First pair is AB, we append it into the empty vector and give it an index of 0.
vec = [A, B]
hm = [(0, val)]
The next pair is BA:
start with vec = [A, B]
using algorithm not shown here, I know that I have a common part between last inserted window (AB) and current window (BA), namely B
append part of the window to the existing vector, so we have vec = [A, B, A]
perform a lookup using index 1 as the index of window
it has not been found so the new key, val is inserted to HashMap
vec = [A, B, A]
hm = [(0, val0), (1, val1)]
Next up is window AB:
once again we have a common part - A
append: vec = [A, B, A, B]
lookup using index 2
it is successful, so I should delete the newly inserted part of window and get the index of the window inside vector - in this case 0
modify value, do something with the key etc...
vec = [A, B, A]
hm = [(0, val0_modified), (1, val1)]
After looping over this input i should end up with:
vec = [A, B, A, B, C, B, A, C]
and indices for pairs could be represented as: [(AB, 0), (BA, 1), (BC, 3), (CB, 4), (AC, 6)]
I do not want to modify keys. I also don't want to modify the vector with the exception of pushing/popping the window during lookup/insertion.
Sidenote: even though I still have redundant information in this particular example after putting everything into vector, it won't be the case while working with the original data.
I wanted to filter a Deedle dataframe based on a list of values how would I go about doing this?
I had an idea to use the following code below:
let d= df1|>filterRowValues(fun row -> row.GetAs<float>("ts") = timex)
However the issue with this is that it is only based on one variable, I then thought of combining this with a for loop and an append function:
for i in 0.. recd.length -1 do
df2.Append(df1|>filterRowValues(fun row -> row.GetAs<float>("ts") = recd.[i]))
This does not work either however and there must be a better way of doing this without using a for loop. In R I could for instance using an %in%.
You can use the F# set type to create a set of the values that you are interested. In the filtering, you can then check whether the set contains the actual value for the row.
For example, say that you have recd of type seq<float>. Then you should be able to write:
let recdSet = set recd
let d = df1 |> Frame.filterRowValues (fun row ->
recdSet.Contains(row.GetAs<float>("ts"))
Some other things that might be useful:
You can replace row.GetAs<float>("ts") with just row?ts (which always returns float and works only when you have a fixed name, like "ts", but it makes the code nicer)
Comparing float values might not be the best thing to do (because of floating point imprecisions, this might not always work as expected).
I want to find whether there is a path from one point to another or not.
For example, 2 -> 4 -> 7
1 -> 3 -> 2 -> 9
5 -> 1 -> 6 -> 8
these are the path.
I want to write a predicate path(Start, End), and arcs are represented by a set of arc(From, To) facts.
For example, when path(1, 7) is given this must return true.
when path(6, 1) is given this must return false. because arcs are directed.
If there is an arc between X and Y, then Path=arc(X,Y). That is,
if arc(X,Y) then path(X,Y)). Or, in Prolog this is:
path(X,Y,[arc(X,Y)]) :- arc(X,Y).
Otherwise, if there is an arc between X and some other node Z, and there is
a path from Z to Y, then there is a path from X to Y too. That is,
if arc(X,Z) and path(Z,Y) then path(X,Y). In Prolog this is:
path(X,Y,[arc(X,Z)|P]) :- arc(X,Z),path(Z,Y,P).
Taken from this site.
You could also bundle this into one predicate that simply takes a list of arcs and recursively searches for a path
Try to answer splitting the problem in elementary problems.
path(From, To) :-
arc(From, Intermediate),
path(Intermediate, To).
But, do you see where path should stop? And if there are cycles, what happens?
What's miss it's the trivial case, stating that path(X, X) it's always true. Add to above rule:
path(To, To).
Maybe it's clearer if we write a single rule, using If Then Else
path(From, To) :-
( From \= To
-> arc(From, Intermediate),
path(Intermediate, To)
; true
).
I have a binary M such that 34= will always be present and the rest may vary between any number of digits but will always be an integer.
M = [<<"34=21">>]
When I run this command I get an answer like
hd([X || <<"34=", X/binary >> <- M])
Answer -> <<"21">>
How can I get this to be an integer with the most care taken to make it as efficient as possible?
[<<"34=",X/binary>>] = M,
list_to_integer(binary_to_list(X)).
That yields the integer 21
As of R16B, the BIF binary_to_integer/1 can be used:
OTP-10300
Added four new bifs, erlang:binary_to_integer/1,2,
erlang:integer_to_binary/1, erlang:binary_to_float/1 and
erlang:float_to_binary/1,2. These bifs work similarly to how
their list counterparts work, except they operate on
binaries. In most cases converting from and to binaries is
faster than converting from and to lists.
These bifs are auto-imported into erlang source files and can
therefore be used without the erlang prefix.
So that would look like:
[<<"34=",X/binary>>] = M,
binary_to_integer(X).
A string representation of a number can be converted by N-48. For multi-digit numbers you can fold over the binary, multiplying by the power of the position of the digit:
-spec to_int(binary()) -> integer().
to_int(Bin) when is_binary(Bin) ->
to_int(Bin, {size(Bin), 0}).
to_int(_, {0, Acc}) ->
erlang:trunc(Acc);
to_int(<<N/integer, Tail/binary>>, {Pos, Acc}) when N >= 48, N =< 57 ->
to_int(Tail, {Pos-1, Acc + ((N-48) * math:pow(10, Pos-1))}).
The performance of this is around 100 times slower than using the list_to_integer(binary_to_list(X)) option.
am josh in Uganda. i created a mnesia fragmented table (64 fragments), and managed to populate it upto 9948723 records. Each fragment was a disc_copies type, with two replicas.
Now, using qlc (query list comprehension), was too slow in searching for a record, and was returning inaccurate results.
I found out that this overhead is that qlc uses the select function of mnesia which traverses the entire table in order to match records. i tried something else below.
-define(ACCESS_MOD,mnesia_frag).
-define(DEFAULT_CONTEXT,transaction).
-define(NULL,'_').
-record(address,{tel,zip_code,email}).
-record(person,{name,sex,age,address = #address{}}).
match()-> Z = fun(Spec) -> mnesia:match_object(Spec) end,Z.
match_object(Pattern)->
Match = match(),
mnesia:activity(?DEFAULT_CONTEXT,Match,[Pattern],?ACCESS_MOD).
Trying this functionality gave me good results. But i found that i have to dynamically build patterns for every search that may be made in my stored procedures.
i decided to go through the havoc of doing this, so i wrote functions which will dynamically build wild patterns for my records depending on which parameter is to be searched.
%% This below gives me the default pattern for all searches ::= {person,'_','_','_'}
pattern(Record_name)->
N = length(my_record_info(Record_name)) + 1,
erlang:setelement(1,erlang:make_tuple(N,?NULL),Record_name).
%% this finds the position of the provided value and places it in that
%% position while keeping '_' in the other positions.
%% The caller function can use this function recursively until
%% it has built the full search pattern of interest
pattern({Field,Value},Pattern_sofar)->
N = position(Field,my_record_info(element(1,Pattern_sofar))),
case N of
-1 -> Pattern_sofar;
Int when Int >= 1 -> erlang:setelement(N + 1,Pattern_sofar,Value);
_ -> Pattern_sofar
end.
my_record_info(Record_name)->
case Record_name of
staff_dynamic -> record_info(fields,staff_dynamic);
person -> record_info(fields,person);
_ -> []
end.
%% These below,help locate the position of an element in a list
%% returned by "-record_info(fields,person)"
position(_,[]) -> -1;
position(Value,List)->
find(lists:member(Value,List),Value,List,1).
find(false,_,_,_) -> -1;
find(true,V,[V|_],N)-> N;
find(true,V,[_|X],N)->
find(V,X,N + 1).
find(V,[V|_],N)-> N;
find(V,[_|X],N) -> find(V,X,N + 1).
This was working very well though it was computationally intensive.
It could still work even after changing the record definition since at compile time, it gets the new record info
The problem is that when i initiate even 25 processes on a 3.0 GHz pentium 4 processor running WinXP, It hangs and takes a long time to return results.
If am to use qlc in these fragments, to get accurate results, i have to specify which fragment to search in like this.
find_person_by_tel(Tel)->
select(qlc:q([ X || X <- mnesia:table(Frag), (X#person.address)#address.tel == Tel])).
select(Q)->
case ?transact(fun() -> qlc:e(Q) end) of
{atomic,Val} -> Val;
{aborted,_} = Error -> report_mnesia_event(Error)
end.
Qlc was returning [], when i search for something yet when i use match_object/1 i get accurate results. I found that using match_expressions can help.
mnesia:table(Tab,Props).
where Props is a data structure that defines the match expression, the chunk size of return values e.t.c
I got a problem when i tried building match expressions dynamically.
Function mnesia:read/1 or mnesia:read/2 requires that you have the primary key
Now am asking myself, how can i efficiently use QLC to search for records in a large fragmented table? Please help.
I know that using tuple representation of records makes code hard to upgrade. This is why
i hate using mnesia:select/1, mnesia:match_object/1 and i want to stick to QLC. QLC is giving me wrong results in my queries from a mnesia table of 64 fragments even on the same node.
Has anyone ever used QLC to query a fragmented table?, please help
Do you invoke the qlc in the activity context?
tfn_match(Id) ->
Search = #person{address=#address{tel=Id, _ = '_'}, _ = '_'},
trans(fun() -> mnesia:match_object(Search) end).
tfn_qlc(Id) ->
Q = qlc:q([ X || X <- mnesia:table(person), (X#person.address)#address.tel == Id]),
trans(fun() -> qlc:e(Q) end).
trans(Fun) ->
try Res = mnesia:activity(transaction, Fun, mnesia_frag),
{atomic, Res}
catch exit:Error ->
{aborted, Error}
end.