RetroSearch Browse

Thu May 10 20:41:53 CEST 2012 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2012-May/119435.html

On Thu, 10 May 2012 20:23:08 +0200
Stefan Krah <stefan at bytereef.org> wrote:
> Antoine Pitrou <solipsis at pitrou.net> wrote:
> > On Wed, 9 May 2012 11:26:29 +0200
> > Stefan Krah <stefan at bytereef.org> wrote:
> > > Antoine Pitrou <solipsis at pitrou.net> wrote:
> > > > > _decimal is about 12% faster without threads, because the expensive
> > > > > thread local context can be disabled.
> > > > 
> > > > If you cached the last thread id along with the corresponding context,
> > > > perhaps it could speed things up in most scenarios?
> > > 
> > > Nice. This reduces the speed difference to about 4%!
> > 
> > Note that you don't need the actual thread id, the Python thread state
> > is sufficient: PyThreadState_GET should be a simply variable lookup in
> > release builds.
> 
> I've tried both ways now and the speed gain is roughly the same.
> 
> Perhaps the interpreter as a whole is slightly faster --without-threads?
> That would explain the remaining speed difference of 4%.

It may be. Can you try other benchmarks?

Regards

Antoine.

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2012-May/119435.html below:

[Python-Dev] Point of building without threads?