Hello, > Solaris X86, 16 cores: some python extension are likely missing (see config.log) > Windows XP SP3, 4 cores: all python extensions but TCL (I didn't bother checking why it failed as it is not used in the benchmark). It is a release build. > > The results look promising but I let you share your conclusion (some latency results seem a bit strange from my understanding).
Thank you! The latency results don't look that strange to me. If you're surprised that py3k shows better latency than newgil on the "pi calculation" workload, it's easy to understand why: py3k speculatively releases the GIL so often on that workload (every 100 opcodes) that the latencies are indeed very good, but if you look at the corresponding throughput numbers they are dismal (your Solaris box shows it falling to less than 20% with two threads running compared to the baseline number for single-thread execution, and on your Windows box the number is hardly better with 45%). So, to sum it up, the way the current GIL manages to have good latencies is by issueing an unreasonable number of system calls on a contended lock, and potentially killing throughput performance (this depends on the OS too, because numbers under Linux are not so catastrophic). The new GIL, on the other hand, is much more balanced in that it achieves rather predictable latencies (especially when you don't overcommit the OS by issueing more computational threads than you have CPU cores) while preserving throughput performance. > Side-note: PCBuild requires nasmw.exe but it no longer exists in the latest > version. I had to rename nasm.exe to nasmw.exe. Would be nice to add this to > the readme to avoid confusion... You should file a bug on http://bugs.python.org Regards Antoine. _______________________________________________ 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
