[Skip Montanaro] > I did try that when the problem was first raised. I just tried it > again. It did have a positive effect: > > w/ threads and w/o pymalloc: > > user system elapsed CPU > 7.64 0.72 0:09.73 85% > 7.86 0.45 0:08.66 95% > 7.66 0.66 0:08.32 99% > > w/o threads and w/ pymalloc: > > user system elapsed CPU > 5.44 0.58 0:06.85 87% > 5.57 0.46 0:06.02 100% > 5.57 0.45 0:06.02 99% Skip, I think this is irrelevant to the OP's problem. You're telling us you can save a few seconds running test_longexp on a box with barely enough memory to run it at all. Barbara is worried about shaving *hours* off it on a box with gobs of memory to spare. Still, I expect pymalloc will fix her problem (since malloc is the only suspect on the list, it better <wink>).
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