> "Martin v. Loewis" wrote: > > > > I just performed some benchmark of pymalloc, compared to glibc 2.2 > > malloc, using xmlproc (a pure-Python XML parser) as the sample > > application. On an artificial input document, the standard > > configuration ran 16.3s; the configuration with pymalloc ran 15s. > > > > I recommend to enable pymalloc by default; I can commit the necessary > > changes if desired. +1 [MAL] > AFAIK, pymalloc still has problems with threading, so I unless this > has already been resolved, I don't think it's a good idea to > enable it by default just yet (since threads are enabled per default > too). The threading problems are a myth. Pymalloc relies on the GIL, yes, but it is only invoked when the GIL is held. Some extensions will break because they don't use the right alloc/dealloc macros (we just fixed a few of these in Zope), but I agree with others that alpha time is a good time to start fortcing this issue. A big warning in NEWS might be useful. --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4