RetroSearch Browse

Wed Aug 16 18:08:13 CEST 2006 · http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2006-August/068307.html

skip at pobox.com schrieb:
> Wouldn't use of obmalloc offset much of that?  Before obmalloc was
> available, the int free list was a huge win.  Is it likely to be such a huge
> win today?

I have now some numbers. For the attached t.py, the unmodified svn
python gives

Test 1 3.25420880318
Test 2 1.86433696747

and the one with the attached patch gives

Test 1 3.45080399513
Test 2 2.09729003906

So there apparently is a performance drop on int allocations of about
5-10%.

On this machine (P4 3.2GHz) I could not find any difference in pystones
from this patch.

Notice that this test case is extremely focused on measuring int
allocation (I just noticed I should have omitted the for loop in
the second case, though).

Regards,
Martin
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: t.py
Type: text/x-python
Size: 181 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20060816/239c9e63/attachment.py 
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: intalloc.diff
Url: http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20060816/239c9e63/attachment.diff 

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2006-August/068307.html below:

[Python-Dev] Benchmarking the int allocator (Was: Type of range object members)