[Python-Dev] Benchmarks: Comparison between Python 2.7 and Python 3.6 performance (original) (raw)
Victor Stinner victor.stinner at gmail.com
Mon Nov 7 18:11:31 EST 2016
- Previous message (by thread): [Python-Dev] Benchmarks: Comparison between Python 2.7 and Python 3.6 performance
- Next message (by thread): [Python-Dev] Summary of Python tracker Issues
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
2016-11-07 20:20 GMT+01:00 Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org>:
That's suspiciously close to the core sprint. Since the -S time stayed roughly the same I suspect that either a new module was added to the startup sequence or one of the (too many) modules already involved grew a lot. My money is on a new module. Using
python -v -c passon a Python built from the Sept. 9 tree and one built from Sept. 15, it shouldn't be too hard to figure out which new module(s).
I identified the regression, I created:
http://bugs.python.org/issue28637
It's a regression caused by:
https://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/223731925d06/ http://bugs.python.org/issue28082
The change added "import enum" in Lib/re.py. I propose to revert this change for now, and discuss later a solution which doesn't impact performances.
It's nice to see that my work of performance was useful to catch a performance regression.
Victor
- Previous message (by thread): [Python-Dev] Benchmarks: Comparison between Python 2.7 and Python 3.6 performance
- Next message (by thread): [Python-Dev] Summary of Python tracker Issues
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]