On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 3:23 PM, Alexandre Vassalotti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, Jun 1, 2008 at 12:28 AM, Adam Olsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Sat, May 31, 2008 at 10:11 PM, Alexandre Vassalotti >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> Would anyone mind if I did add a public C API for gc.disable() and >>> gc.enable()? I would like to use it as an optimization for the pickle >>> module (I found out that I get a good 2x speedup just by disabling the >>> GC while loading large pickles). Of course, I could simply import the >>> gc module and call the functions there, but that seems overkill to me. >>> I included the patch below for review. >> >> I'd rather see it fixed. It behaves quadratically if you load enough >> to trigger full collection a few times. >> > > Do you have any idea how this behavior could be fixed? I am not a GC > expert, but I could try to fix this.
Not sure. For long-running programs we actually want a quadratic cost, but spread out over a long period of time. It's the bursts of allocation that shouldn't be quadratic. So maybe balance it by the total number of allocations that have happened. If the total number of allocations is less than 10 times the allocations that weren't promptly deleted, assume it's a burst. If it's more than 10 times, assume it's over a long period. -- Adam Olsen, aka Rhamphoryncus _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
