A very fast way to convert numbers into datetime ?

94 vues (au cours des 30 derniers jours)
Sim
Sim le 8 Déc 2022
Commenté : Sim le 14 Déc 2022
Is there any faster way then what showed in the following example to convert numbers into datetime ?
% Input:
time = [ 2.02210270954498e+16
2.02210271650345e+16
2.02210270854021e+16
2.02210271304501e+16
2.02210271854288e+16
2.02210271748533e+16
2.02210271717544e+16
2.02210271659356e+16
2.02210271209301e+16
2.02210271145566e+16
2.0221027124415e+16
2.02210271043238e+16
2.02210271226421e+16
2.0221027194043e+16
2.02210271044584e+16
2.02210271747289e+16
2.02210271526449e+16
2.02210271400009e+16
2.02210271753212e+16
2.02210271008031e+16
2.02210271004171e+16
2.0221027114025e+16
2.02210270918585e+16
2.02210271549196e+16
2.0221027134255e+16
2.02210271520466e+16
2.02210271552524e+16
2.02210271056362e+16
2.02210271610381e+16
2.02210271157507e+16
2.02210271320401e+16
2.02210271334491e+16
2.02210271558493e+16
2.02210271811281e+16
2.02210271644034e+16
2.02210271209346e+16
2.02210271631079e+16
2.02210271045395e+16
2.02210271004233e+16
2.02210270945555e+16
2.02210271043468e+16
2.02210270929154e+16
2.02210271301133e+16
2.0221027175642e+16
2.02210271337459e+16
2.02210271644043e+16
2.02210271231201e+16
2.02210271624433e+16
2.02210271700406e+16
2.02210271803474e+16
2.02210271215051e+16
2.02210271624368e+16
2.02210271400011e+16
2.02210270820096e+16
2.02210271249262e+16
2.02210271303242e+16
2.02210270934301e+16
2.02210271023499e+16
2.02210271024505e+16
2.02210271234557e+16
2.0221027173109e+16
2.02210271141147e+16
2.0221027171211e+16
2.0221027171336e+16
2.02210271050369e+16
2.02210271100339e+16
2.02210271712135e+16
2.0221027093251e+16
2.02210270813426e+16
2.02210271536101e+16
2.02210272249422e+16
2.02210271139262e+16
2.02210271802585e+16
2.02210270932514e+16
2.0221027135005e+16
2.02210271647141e+16
2.02210271659521e+16
2.02210271152253e+16
2.02210271632355e+16
2.02210271106299e+16
2.02210271508318e+16
2.02210271013477e+16
2.02210271112198e+16
2.02210271126206e+16
2.02210271420079e+16
2.02210271702577e+16
2.02210271501366e+16
2.02210271045333e+16
2.02210271555391e+16
2.02210271514332e+16
2.02210271443004e+16
2.02210271010239e+16
2.022102712154e+16
2.02210271639551e+16
2.02210271321279e+16
2.02210271610501e+16
2.02210271320145e+16
2.02210271700372e+16
2.02210271023158e+16
2.02210271445046e+16];
T = table(time);
% Output:
% Any way to make the following part way any faster ?
tic
S = string(uint64(T.time));
T.time = datetime(S, 'inputFormat','uuuuMMddHHmmssSSS', 'Format','yyyy-MM-dd HH:mm:ss.SSS');
toc
Elapsed time is 0.023786 seconds.

Réponse acceptée

Eric Delgado
Eric Delgado le 9 Déc 2022
Modifié(e) : Eric Delgado le 11 Déc 2022
You are right @Voss... I just run it 100 times and there's no difference at all. :(
% Input:
time = [ 2.02210270954498e+16; ...
2.02210271650345e+16; ...
2.02210270854021e+16; ...
2.02210271304501e+16; ...
2.02210271854288e+16; ...
2.02210271748533e+16; ...
2.02210271717544e+16; ...
2.02210271659356e+16; ...
2.02210271209301e+16; ...
2.02210271145566e+16; ...
2.0221027124415e+16; ...
2.02210271043238e+16; ...
2.02210271226421e+16; ...
2.0221027194043e+16; ...
2.02210271044584e+16; ...
2.02210271747289e+16; ...
2.02210271526449e+16; ...
2.02210271445046e+16];
% Output:
% Any way to make the following part way any faster ?
S1 = string(uint64(time));
approach1_time = zeros(100,1);
approach2_time = zeros(100,1);
for ii = 1:100
tic
time1 = datetime(S1, 'inputFormat','uuuuMMddHHmmssSSS', 'Format','yyyy-MM-dd HH:mm:ss.SSS');
approach1_time(ii) = toc;
tic
time2 = datetime(S1, 'inputFormat','uuuuMMddHHmmssSSS');
time2.Format = 'yyyy-MM-dd HH:mm:ss.SSS';
approach2_time(ii) = toc;
end
mean(approach1_time)
ans = 0.0016
mean(approach2_time)
ans = 0.0016
  4 commentaires
Voss
Voss le 9 Déc 2022
Modifié(e) : Voss le 9 Déc 2022
@Sim: The purpose of my comment was to show that the time taken by the two different approaches for setting the Format of a datetime array are not significantly different. They appeared to be different in @Eric Delgado's answer, but that (I suspected - and the times in my comment seem to support my suspicion) was because his T2 was not contained in a table. In other words, I suspected that the time required to access a variable in a table explained most of the time difference. In my comment, I created a second table for what I thought would be a more appropriate test, which showed that the times are about the same. You definitely do not need to create a new table T2. I did that only for comparing the times of the two approaches.
Bottom line, it takes about the same amount of time whether you do it like this:
T1.time = datetime(S1, 'inputFormat','uuuuMMddHHmmssSSS', 'Format','yyyy-MM-dd HH:mm:ss.SSS');
Or like this:
T1.time = datetime(S1, 'inputFormat','uuuuMMddHHmmssSSS');
T1.time.Format = 'yyyy-MM-dd HH:mm:ss.SSS';
And in my opinion the first way is preferable for its concision.
(See the attached m-file for more reliable timing measurements using timeit instead of tic/toc.)
timing_test
Time required for first approach: 0.00621062 s Time required for second approach: 0.00637461 s
Sim
Sim le 12 Déc 2022
Thanks both @Eric Delgado and @Voss !
So, basically, if I understood correctly, the solution of @Eric Delgado is not so different from the solution I wrote in my question... So... @Eric Delgado, should I unaccept the answer since the time is more or less the same as mine ? Or should I just leave it as "accepted" and waiting for other potential answers ? :-)
Thank you very much for your efforts and time! :-)

Connectez-vous pour commenter.

Plus de réponses (1)

Peter Perkins
Peter Perkins le 12 Déc 2022
Syntactically,
>> time = datetime("202210270954498", 'inputFormat','uuuuMMddHHmmssSSS', 'Format','yyyy-MM-dd HH:mm:ss.SSS')
time =
datetime
2022-10-27 09:54:49.800
is easy to write (although if you really expect the last two S's in SSS to work, you are out of luck -- you need uint64, not double). But you did say "very fast". Performance-wise, you are converting numeric->string->datetime. There is
>> time = datetime(20221027,"ConvertFrom","yyyymmdd",'format','yyyy-MM-dd HH:mm:ss.SSS')
time =
datetime
2022-10-27 00:00:00.000
but no
time = datetime(20221027,"ConvertFrom","yyyyMMddHHmmssSSS",...
but it's not too hard to write the code: look at datetime/convertFrom and extend it. Likely to be faster for large data.

Catégories

En savoir plus sur Logical dans Help Center et File Exchange

Community Treasure Hunt

Find the treasures in MATLAB Central and discover how the community can help you!

Start Hunting!

Translated by