We on the Pyston team have created some new benchmarks which I can recommend using; I wouldn't call them "macrobenchmarks" since they don't test entire applications, but we've found them to be better than the existing benchmarks, which tend to be quite microbenchmarky. For example, our django-templating benchmark actually exercises the django templating system, as opposed to bm_django.py which just tests unicode concatenation. You can find them here https://github.com/dropbox/pyston-perf/tree/master/benchmarking/benchmark_suite The current ones we look at are django_template3_10x, sqlalchemy_imperative2_10x, and pyxl_bench_10x.
On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 10:36 AM, Brett Cannon <br...@python.org> wrote: > Are we happy with the current benchmarks? Are there some we want to drop? > How about add? Do we want to have explanations as to why each benchmark is > included? A better balance of micro vs. macro benchmarks (and probably > matching groups)? > > _______________________________________________ > Speed mailing list > Speed@python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/speed > >
_______________________________________________ Speed mailing list Speed@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/speed
