On Tue, Nov 08, 2005 at 10:44:41AM -0500, Daniel Henninger wrote:
> I actually ran into a lot of slowness with Python 2.4. I really have
> no idea why. I mean it could be anything from the way I compiled it,
> to pure dumb luck, so I'd also be interested in some sort of benchmarks.
Do you mean how you compiled Python? Perhaps you didn't disable
debugging etc.?
Benchmarking with eg. Debian packages would take out one variable:
compilation issues/options . . .
--
Andreas [ http://unstable.nl | xmpp:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ]
[ callto:ils.seconix.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ]
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url :
http://modevia.com/pipermail/py-transports/attachments/20051108/a79ca6a1/attachment.pgp
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Nov 8 18:24:44 2005
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Daniel Henninger)
Date: Tue Nov 8 18:25:26 2005
Subject: [py-transports] What python version tu use
In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Tue, Nov 08, 2005 at 10:44:41AM -0500, Daniel Henninger wrote:
>> I actually ran into a lot of slowness with Python 2.4. I really have
>> no idea why. I mean it could be anything from the way I compiled it,
>> to pure dumb luck, so I'd also be interested in some sort of
>> benchmarks.
>
> Do you mean how you compiled Python? Perhaps you didn't disable
> debugging etc.?
Yup. I know I went with defaults for most things, but you never
know. ;D I have lots of versions of libraries installed and this
and that.
That said, I did have a bug report about slowness with 2.4, so I
guess I'm not the only one.
Daniel
