On Dec 5, 7:08 pm, Alex Gaynor <alex.gay...@gmail.com> wrote: > It depends *why* it's slow. If it's slow as a consequence of all the bytes > calls and extra encoding/decoding, yeah I'd say that's a blocker, because > it'll never improve otherwise. On the other hand if it's slow because > psycopg happens to be slow on py3k, well, that's someone else's problem > then and I'm ok to merge it.
I've just started a run on unported Django with my postgresql configuration. No hard data yet, but it seems just as slow as the dots get printed to the screen. I guess that might be good news for the port, but we'll wait and see what the final time is ... just to give an idea, I re-ran the test on the port, but without using RAMdisk for the data (but still with fsync = off), that took around 3h 15 min ... I've only got a GB of RAM, running in a VM, and have done no tuning other than fsync = off, so data from other testers might be more representative than my own. Regards, Vinay Sajip -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
