[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Hi!
> I think that looking at the two bottlenecks as suggested is a very > good idea and should have the highest priority. We don't know nearly > enough about how much time Python in general and Twisted in > particular is stealing from us. In principle, we could be in a > situation where it is hopeless to get the performance we should be > able to get unless we ditch Python and implement Twisted ourselves > in C++. Yes, we need a much better understanding of what is going on. Only then can be start talking about what kind of performance it is realistic to hope for, and then look at how to achieve it. > Note that I am not saying we are in that situation, in fact I don't > think so - but I am saying that it is important to find out ASAP! Agreed! I would be very happy to hear suggestions as to how we can measure things in VIFF and/or Twisted. I have tried looking at the idle time in the reactor (Twisted's event loop) and found that it blocks on the select call only 40 times when multiplying 4000. It starts by sleeps 20 ms in 23 select calls, and then alternates between the following two steps: * 315-317 multiplications finish * sleeps 10-11 ms in 2 select call I don't know yet what the number 315 corresponds to... -- Martin Geisler VIFF (Virtual Ideal Functionality Framework) brings easy and efficient SMPC (Secure Multi-Party Computation) to Python. See: http://viff.dk/. _______________________________________________ viff-devel mailing list (http://viff.dk/) viff-devel@viff.dk http://lists.viff.dk/listinfo.cgi/viff-devel-viff.dk
