Charles-François Natali <neolo...@free.fr> added the comment: (I'm not sure Rietveld sent the message so I post it here, sorry in case of duplicate).
Steffen, I've made a quick review of your patch, in case you're interested. I think that this functionality can be really useful to some people, and it'd be nice if your patch could stabilize somewhat so that committers can review it properly and eventually merge it. Concerning your benchmark: I don't know exactly what you're measuring, but when performing I/O-related benchmarks, it's always a good idea to run each test several times in a row, or flush the page/buffer cache before each run: the reason is that the the second run benefits from the page/buffer cache, which often speeds things up dramatically. Example: # time find /lib -type f -exec cat {} \; > /dev/null real 0m20.455s user 0m8.145s sys 0m5.256s # time find /lib -type f -exec cat {} \; > /dev/null real 0m6.827s user 0m8.477s sys 0m4.804s # echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches # time find /lib -type f -exec cat {} \; > /dev/null real 0m19.954s user 0m8.069s sys 0m5.364s ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue11877> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com