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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2012-October/122433.html below:

[Python-Dev] Python 3.3 vs. Python 2.7 benchmark results (again, but this time more solid numbers)

• Previous message: [Python-Dev] Python 3.3 vs. Python 2.7 benchmark results (again, but this time more solid numbers)
• Next message: [Python-Dev] Python 3.3 vs. Python 2.7 benchmark results (again, but this time more solid numbers)
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Maciej Fijalkowski <fijall at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Armin Rigo <arigo at tunes.org> wrote:
> > May I express doubts about telco? :-)  It looks like the Python 3
> > version is simply not running:
> >
> >> ### telco ###
> >> Min: 0.810000 -> 0.010000: 81.00x faster
> >> Avg: 0.823600 -> 0.015200: 54.18x faster
> 
> I think the original explanation was cDecimal vs decimal.

Yes, the magnitude of the speedup looks correct. In an isolated benchmark
with the large input file [1] I'm getting 30x speedup for telco.


Stefan Krah

[1] http://www.bytereef.org/mpdecimal/quickstart.html#telco-benchmark - expon180-1e6b.zip

• Previous message: [Python-Dev] Python 3.3 vs. Python 2.7 benchmark results (again, but this time more solid numbers)
• Next message: [Python-Dev] Python 3.3 vs. Python 2.7 benchmark results (again, but this time more solid numbers)
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

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