I want to extract sorted data from a huge database based upon two (or more) keys in a very timely manner. Here is a reproducible toy example for two keys only:

n = 10^5;
keys = RandomInteger[{1, 100}, n];
vals = RandomReal[{0, 1}, n];

data = Transpose[{keys, vals}];

The fastest "traditional" way I' ve found:

result1 = Sort @ Cases[data, {25 | 73, r_} :> r];

Much much faster is a V10 solution:

assoc = Merge[Association /@ Rule @@@ data, Identity];

(I use Mergeto allow for duplicate keys, and the time cost of getting assoc is not important to me).

result2 = Sort[assoc[25] ~ Join ~ assoc[73]];

result1 == result2


Speed comparison:

Do[Sort @ Cases[data, {25 | 73, r_} :> r], {100}]; // AbsoluteTiming // First


Do[Sort[assoc[25] ~ Join ~ assoc[73]], {100}]; // AbsoluteTiming // First


Certainly one reason to upgrade, but two or more questions remain:

(a) Could this code be improved ?

(b) And, passing to n = 10^6, result1 still works, but result2 runs forever and has to be aborted.


In response to a), you can write Merge[Rule @@@ data, Identity], which is slightly simpler.

In response to b), there are two different ways to do this nicely. One of which works in 10.0.0, the other will have to wait for 10.0.1.

In 10.0.0 we can use GroupBy to associate each unique key with the set of corresponding values:

grouped = GroupBy[data, First -> Last];

Now do lookups by writing, e.g.:



Catenate @ Lookup[grouped, {25, 73}]

You can also use PositionIndex. Unfortunately 10.0.0 has a slow implementation of PositionIndex as described here. But this is fixed in 10.0.1, takes a fraction of a second to complete on your example for n=6. It's actually faster than the GroupBy code above.

keyindex = PositionIndex[keys];

Now we can easily look up the positions for which the key was 25, and from that get the corresponding values:

Part[vals, keyindex[25]]

To look up both 25 and 73 we just do:

Part[vals, Catenate @ Lookup[keyindex, {25, 73}]]
| improve this answer | |
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Défiez-vous des premiers mouvements, parce qu'ils sont bons. Merci mille fois :) $\endgroup$ – eldo Sep 4 '14 at 23:28

You can use the ResourceFunction GroupByList to do this. Your example:

n = 10^5;
keys = RandomInteger[{1, 100}, n];
vals = RandomReal[{0, 1}, n];

data = Transpose[{keys, vals}];


r1 = GroupBy[data, First -> Last]; //AbsoluteTiming
r2 = Merge[Rule @@@ data, Identity]; //AbsoluteTiming
r3 = ResourceFunction["GroupByList"][vals, keys]; //AbsoluteTiming

r1 === r2 === r3

{0.053079, Null}

{0.395158, Null}

{0.002779, Null}


Also, GroupByList is faster than PositionIndex:

PositionIndex[keys]; //AbsoluteTiming

{0.010389, Null}

| improve this answer | |

There were (are) many methods faster than your Cases code for earlier versions.

Two of the best are simple DownValues assignments, e.g. fn[key] = {val1, val2, ...} and Rules optimized with Dispatch. I believe the latter is usually slightly faster so I will illustrate that one.

dsp = Dispatch[ #[[1, 1]] -> #[[All, 2]] & /@ GatherBy[data, First] ];


Join[25, 73] /. dsp

By the way, for your particular data it would be better to store the list of values as a packed array by using this in the line above:

#[[1, 1]] -> Developer`ToPackedArray @ #[[All, 2]] &
| improve this answer | |
  • $\begingroup$ Especially your ToPackedArray-Version is EXTREMELY fast. Nevertheless, I'm also fascinated with the V10 developments. $\endgroup$ – eldo Sep 5 '14 at 14:12

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.