RetroSearch Browse

Fri Apr 23 20:27:09 CEST 2010 · http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2010-April/099648.html

On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 11:11, Dan Gindikin <dgindikin at gmail.com> wrote:

> We were having performance problems unpickling a large pickle file, we were
> getting 170s running time (which was fine), but 1100mb memory usage. Memory
> usage ought to have been about 300mb, this was happening because of memory
> fragmentation, due to many unnecessary "puts" in the pickle stream.
>
> We made a pickletools.optimize inspired tool that could run directly on a
> pickle file and used pickletools.genops. This solved the unpickling problem
> (84s, 382mb).
>
> However the tool itself was using too much memory and time (1100s, 470mb),
> so
> I recoded it to scan through the pickle stream directly, without going
> through
> pickletools.genops, giving (240s, 130mb).
>
> Other people that deal with large pickle files are probably having similar
> problems, and since this comes up when dealing with large data it is
> precisely
> in this situation that you probably can't use pickletools.optimize or
> pickletools.genops. It feels like functionality that ought to be added to
> pickletools, is there some way I can contribute this?
>

The best next step is to open an issue at bugs.python.org and upload the
patch. I can't make any guarantees on when someone will look at it or if it
will get accepted, but putting the code there is your best bet for
acceptance.

-Brett
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20100423/a40333f8/attachment-0001.html>

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

Showing content from http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2010-April/099648.html below:

[Python-Dev] Unpickling memory usage problem, and a proposed solution