Re: [Python-Dev] Modify PyMem_Malloc to use pymalloc for performance

On 03.02.2016 22:03, Victor Stinner wrote: > Hi, > > There is an old discussion about the performance of PyMem_Malloc() > memory allocator. CPython is stressing a lot memory allocators. Last > time I made statistics, it was for the PEP 454: > "For example, the Python test suites calls malloc() ,

Re: [Python-Dev] Modify PyMem_Malloc to use pymalloc for performance

On 04.02.2016 13:29, Victor Stinner wrote: > Hi, > > 2016-02-04 11:17 GMT+01:00 M.-A. Lemburg : >>> Do you see any drawback of using pymalloc for PyMem_Malloc()? >> >> Yes: You cannot free memory allocated using pymalloc with the >> standard C lib free(). > > That's not

Re: [Python-Dev] Modify PyMem_Malloc to use pymalloc for performance

Hi, 2016-02-04 11:17 GMT+01:00 M.-A. Lemburg : >> Do you see any drawback of using pymalloc for PyMem_Malloc()? > > Yes: You cannot free memory allocated using pymalloc with the > standard C lib free(). That's not completly new. If Python is compiled in debug mode, you get a

Re: [Python-Dev] Opcode cache in ceval loop

> On Feb 4, 2016, at 08:22, Sven R. Kunze wrote: > > On 04.02.2016 16:57, Matthias Bussonnier wrote: >>> On Feb 3, 2016, at 13:22, Yury Selivanov wrote: >>> >>> >>> An ideal way would be to calculate a hit/miss ratio over time >>> for each cached

Re: [Python-Dev] More optimisation ideas

On 2/4/2016 12:18 PM, Sven R. Kunze wrote: On 04.02.2016 14:09, Nick Coghlan wrote: On 2 February 2016 at 06:39, Andrew Barnert via Python-Dev wrote: On Feb 1, 2016, at 09:59,mike.romb...@comcast.net wrote: If the stdlib were to use implicit namespace packages

Re: [Python-Dev] Python environment registration in the Windows Registry

On 3 February 2016 at 15:15, Steve Dower wrote: > Presented in PEP-like form here, but if feedback suggests > just putting it in the docs I'm okay with that too. We don't really have anywhere in the docs to track platform integration topics like this, so an Informational

Re: [Python-Dev] Modify PyMem_Malloc to use pymalloc for performance

On 04.02.2016 14:25, Victor Stinner wrote: > Thanks for your feedback, you are asking good questions :-) > > 2016-02-04 13:54 GMT+01:00 M.-A. Lemburg : >>> There are 536 calls to the functions PyMem_Malloc(), PyMem_Realloc() >>> and PyMem_Free(). >>> >>> I would prefer to modify

Re: [Python-Dev] More optimisation ideas

On 2 February 2016 at 02:40, R. David Murray wrote: > On the other hand, if the distros go the way Nick has (I think) been > advocating, and have a separate 'system python for system scripts' that > is independent of the one installed for user use, having the system-only >

Re: [Python-Dev] Modify PyMem_Malloc to use pymalloc for performance

Thanks for your feedback, you are asking good questions :-) 2016-02-04 13:54 GMT+01:00 M.-A. Lemburg : >> There are 536 calls to the functions PyMem_Malloc(), PyMem_Realloc() >> and PyMem_Free(). >> >> I would prefer to modify a single place having to replace 536 calls :-/ > >

Re: [Python-Dev] Opcode cache in ceval loop

On 3 February 2016 at 06:49, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: > Yury Selivanov writes: > > > Not sure about that... PEPs take a LOT of time :( > > Informational PEPs need not take so much time, no more than you would > spend on ceval.txt. I'm sure a PEP would get a lot more

Re: [Python-Dev] speed.python.org

On 4 February 2016 at 16:48, Zachary Ware wrote: > I'm happy to announce that speed.python.org is finally functional! > There's not much there yet, as each benchmark builder has only sent > one result so far (and one of those involved a bit of cheating on my > part),

Re: [Python-Dev] More optimisation ideas

On 2 February 2016 at 06:39, Andrew Barnert via Python-Dev wrote: > On Feb 1, 2016, at 09:59, mike.romb...@comcast.net wrote: >> >> If the stdlib were to use implicit namespace packages >> ( https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0420/ ) and the various >> loaders/importers

Re: [Python-Dev] More optimisation ideas

On Thu, Feb 04, 2016 at 07:58:30PM -0500, Terry Reedy wrote: > >>For folks that *do* know how to use the terminal: > >> > >>$ python3 -m inspect --details inspect > >>Target: inspect > >>Origin: /usr/lib64/python3.4/inspect.py > >>Cached: /usr/lib64/python3.4/__pycache__/inspect.cpython-34.pyc >

Re: [Python-Dev] Opcode cache in ceval loop

Nick Coghlan writes: > If someone else wanted to also describe the change in a PEP for ease > of future reference, using Yury's ceval.txt as input, I do think that > would be a good thing, but I wouldn't want to make the enhancement > conditional on someone volunteering to do that. I wasn't

Re: [Python-Dev] Speeding up CPython 5-10%

On 3 February 2016 at 03:52, Brett Cannon wrote: > Fifth, if we manage to show that a C API can easily be added to CPython to > make a JIT something that can simply be plugged in and be useful, then we > will also have a basic JIT framework for people to use. As I said, our use

Re: [Python-Dev] speed.python.org

On 4 February 2016 at 16:48, Zachary Ware wrote: > I'm happy to announce that speed.python.org is finally functional! > There's not much there yet, as each benchmark builder has only sent > one result so far (and one of those involved a bit of cheating on my > part),

Re: [Python-Dev] Opcode cache in ceval loop

> On Feb 3, 2016, at 13:22, Yury Selivanov wrote: > > > An ideal way would be to calculate a hit/miss ratio over time > for each cached opcode, but that would be an expensive > calculation. Do you mean like a sliding windows ? Otherwise if you just want a let's say

Re: [Python-Dev] Opcode cache in ceval loop

On 04.02.2016 16:57, Matthias Bussonnier wrote: On Feb 3, 2016, at 13:22, Yury Selivanov wrote: An ideal way would be to calculate a hit/miss ratio over time for each cached opcode, but that would be an expensive calculation. Do you mean like a sliding windows ?

Re: [Python-Dev] More optimisation ideas

On 04.02.2016 14:09, Nick Coghlan wrote: On 2 February 2016 at 06:39, Andrew Barnert via Python-Dev wrote: On Feb 1, 2016, at 09:59, mike.romb...@comcast.net wrote: If the stdlib were to use implicit namespace packages ( https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0420/ ) and

Re: [Python-Dev] Python environment registration in the Windows Registry

I am well aware of this. In the SO question I referenced, being the first google hit related this this... that is the answer *I* gave. It only works, in my experience, 60% of the time, and not with two biggie packages (pywin32, for which you have to go to third parties to get the wheel, which

Re: [Python-Dev] speed.python.org

Great! 2016-02-04 7:48 GMT+01:00 Zachary Ware : > I'm happy to announce that speed.python.org is finally functional! > There's not much there yet, as each benchmark builder has only sent > one result so far (and one of those involved a bit of cheating on my > part),