BJörn Lindqvist wrote: > 2008/10/27 James Mills <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 5:40 PM, David Cournapeau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> Depends on the tool: build tool and source control tools are example >>> it matters (specially when you start interfaciing them with IDE or >>> editors). Having fast command line tools is an important feature of >>> UNIX, and if you want to insert a python-based tool in a given >>> pipeline, it can hurt it the pipeline is regularly updated. >> Fair enough. But still: >> 0.5s old startup is fast enough >> 0.08s warm startup is fast enough. >> >> Often "fast enough" is "fast enough" > > Nope, when it comes to start up speed the only thing that is fast > enough is "instantly." :) For example, if I write a GUI text editor in > Python, the total cold start up time might be 1500 ms on a cold > system. 750 ms for the interpreter and 750 ms for the app itself. > However, if I also have other processes competing for IO, torrent > downloads or compilations for example, the start up time grows > proportional to the disk load. For example, if there is 50% constant > disk load, my app will start in 1.5 / (1 - 0.5) = 3 seconds (in the > best case, assuming IO access is allocated as efficiently as possible > when the number of processes grows, which it isn't). If the load is > 75%, the start time becomes 1.5 / (1 - 0.75) = 6 seconds. > > Now if the Python interpreters start up time was 200 ms, by apps start > up time with 75% disk load becomes (0.2 + 0.75) / (1 - 0.75) = 3.8 > seconds which is significantly better. > > But still not fast enough to be regarded as even close to "instant", so you appear to be fiddling while Rome burns ...
reqards Steve -- Steve Holden +1 571 484 6266 +1 800 494 3119 Holden Web LLC http://www.holdenweb.com/ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list