"M.-A. Lemburg" wrote: > > Michael Hudson wrote: > > > > "M.-A. Lemburg" <mal@lemburg.com> writes: > > > > > Sure are... but I'm not so much interested in the absolute numbers > > > -- it's the hot-spots which showed up that scare me: e.g. dictionary > > > creation seems to have suffered along the way for some reason, > > > functions calls are even slower now than they were previously and > > > other important tasks such a instance creation take a similar hit > > > (probably as a result of the other two). > > > > Have you tried fiddling with gc parameters? If the GC does a multi > > generation trawl through the heap in the middle of some test, that > > might skew the numbers in unexpected ways. > > > > Or not, of course. > > No, I haven't tried fiddling with those. I'm not sure I want > to either ;-) ... the reason is that applications won't switch > off GC for execution and so the tests is closer to real life. > > Still, I'll rerun the test suite using gc.disable() and post the > results. Turns out, the difference is not noticable (< 1%). -- Marc-Andre Lemburg CEO eGenix.com Software GmbH ______________________________________________________________________ Company & Consulting: http://www.egenix.com/ Python Software: http://www.lemburg.com/python/
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