On Mar 25, 2010, at 4:29 PM, Miquel Torres wrote:

> Hi all!
> 
> I have implemented a small new feature for the speed center. In the Overview, 
> you are now able to select to which results you wish to compare the 
> performance of the selected interpreter. That allows a couple of interesting 
> investigations to be made (bear with me if I say obvious things):
> 
> 1 - http://speed.pypy.org/overview/?interpreter=3)
> We already knew that there are 5 benchmarks where pypy-c without the jit is 
> more than twice times slower than cpython: slowspitfire, twisted_iteration, 
> twisted_tcp, html5lib and worst of all spambayes.
> 
> 2 - http://speed.pypy.org/overview/
> The jit makes up for some of them, only twisted_tcp, slowspitfire and 
> spambayes remain as cases where cpython is much faster.
> 
> 3 - http://speed.pypy.org/overview/?baseline=4
> We can now compare pypy-c-jit with cpython with psyco acceleration. The first 
> thing that stands out, is that pypy is much slower... exactly in the same 
> cases where pypy-c without the jit is slower than cpython (no surprise). The 
> second one, is that apart from those 5 cases where the jit is held back by 
> bad pypy-c baseline performance, pypy-c-jit is already much better than 
> psyco, about twice as fast!

Pretty cool, but is python with psyco using psyco.full or just jitting some 
parts? maybe there is a lot of room for manually tunning psyco (but there is no 
way to do this for pypy afaik).


> 4 - http://speed.pypy.org/overview/?baseline=3
> Another new comparison is pypy-c-jit to pypy-c (revision 72012). Here we can 
> confirm that the jit accelerates *everything* that we currenly measure, and 
> most by a very good factor. The 3 slow benchmarks from comparison 2 are here 
> last, the are accelerated the least by the jit.
> 
> So to me the conclusion is that the jit has good enough performance for a 
> first version, and that only poor pypy-c performance in some cases is holding 
> the pypy project from becoming a better option than cpython. Wouldn't it be a 
> good aim to make it a priority of the next (1.3?) release to improve on that? 
> ;-)
> 
> Apart from it making pypy more "ready", there is a problem if that is not 
> addressed while further jit development continues. An application is only so 
> fast as its slowest part, so even if the jit accelerates some cases 100-fold, 
> it won't help many applications.
> 
> I plan to add a new view with graphs that will show exactly what the problem 
> is.
> 
> Cheers!
> Miquel
> 
> 
> PD: you can also for example compare pypy-c-jit to pypy-c-jit 72012 and see 
> what improvements there have been since then
> _______________________________________________
> [email protected]
> http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/pypy-dev

--
Leonardo Santagada
santagada at gmail.com



_______________________________________________
[email protected]
http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/pypy-dev

Reply via email to