On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 3:56 PM, Barry Warsaw <ba...@python.org> wrote: > * How do you achieve faster hot start times with XAR over native file > system? That's a bit unexpected, although based on our shiv work, I can > imagine some things about how you start Python or lay out the code that > might provide better hot start times (e.g. fewer entries on sys.path and a > fanatical avoidance of pkg_resources). OTOH, I'd think that relying on FUSE > would impose some additional overhead over native file systems.
Hi all, I collected the XAR benchmark numbers. I spent some time today investigating what exactly is causing the difference between native and XAR start times. The native installation I was benchmarking against used `pkg_resources.load_entry_point()` to run the script, while XAR called the entry point directly. I didn't realize that `pip install .` behavior differs based on whether `wheel` is installed or not. When wheel is installed pip uses `bdist_wheel` to build the package and uses its own loader script which calls the entry point directly. When it isn't it uses `python setup.py install` to build the package and uses the setuptools loader script which use `pkg_resources.load_entry_point()` to call the script. If I rerun the experiment with the wheel loader script (without pkg_resources), I see these hot start times: black: 0.171 s (vs 0.208 for XAR) jupyter-nbextension: 0.165 s (vs 0.179 s for XAR) Without the pkg_resources difference we have a small overhead over native installs. Best, Nick -- Distutils-SIG mailing list -- distutils-sig@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to distutils-sig-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mm3/mailman3/lists/distutils-sig.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/mm3/archives/list/distutils-sig@python.org/message/E7J7NP4VVHYPSALAFREO53QUO6FIM6PK/
