[IronPython] Performance of IronPython 2 Beta 4 and IronPython 1
Michael Foord
fuzzyman at voidspace.org.uk
Thu Aug 14 18:41:56 CEST 2008
Just for fun I also compared with CPython. The results are interesting,
I'll turn it into a blog post of course...
Results in milliseconds with a granularity of about 15ms and so an
accuracy of +/- ~60ms.
All testing with 10 000 000 operations unless otherwise stated.
The version of Python I compared against was Python 2.4.
Empty loop (overhead):
IP1: 422
IP2: 438
Py: 3578
Create instance newstyle:
IP1: 20360
IP2: 1109
Py: 4063
Create instance oldstyle:
IP1: 3766
IP2: 3359
Py: 4797
Function call:
IP1: 937
IP2: 906
Py: 3313
Create function: 25% slower
IP1: 2828
IP2: 3640
Py: 2766
Define newstyle (1 000 000):
IP1: 42047
IP2: 20484
Py: 23921
Define oldstyle (1 000 000): 33% slower
IP1: 1781
IP2: 2671
Py: 2108
Comparing (== and !=):
IP1: 278597
IP2: 117662
Py: 62423
Sets:
IP1: 37095
IP2: 30860
Py: 8047
Lists (10 000): 50% slower
IP1: 10422
IP2: 16109
Py: 6094
Recursion (10 000):
IP1: 1125
IP2: 1000
Py: 3609
Sets2 (100 000): 500% slower
IP1: 4984
IP2: 30547
Py: 1203
func_with_args:
IP1: 6312
IP2: 5906
Py: 11250
method_with_args:
IP1: 20594
IP2: 11813
Py: 14875
method_with_kwargs:
IP1: 27953
IP2: 11187
Py: 20032
import: 15% slower
IP1: 28469
IP2: 32000
Py: 25782
global: 20% slower
IP1: 1047
IP2: 1203
Py: 4141
Exceptions (100000): 40% slower
IP1: 4703
IP2: 6125
Py: 266
Engine execution: 8000% slower!!
IP1: 1600
IP2: 115002
Michael Foord wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I've ported Resolver One to run on IronPython 2 Beta 4 to check for
> any potential problems (we will only do a *proper* port once IP 2 is
> out of beta).
>
> The basic porting was straightforward and several bugs have been fixed
> since IP 2 B3 - many thanks to the IronPython team.
>
> The good news is that Resolver One is only 30-50% slower than Resolver
> One on IronPython 1! (It was 300 - 400% slower on top of IP 2 B3.)
> Resolver One is fairly heavily optimised around the performance
> hotspots of IronPython 1, so we expect to have to do a fair bit of
> profiling and refactoring to readjust to the performance profile of IP 2.
>
> Having said that, there are a few oddities (and the areas that slow
> down vary tremendously depending on which spreadsheet we use to
> benchmark it - making it fairly difficult to track down the hotspots).
>
> We have one particular phase of spreadsheet calculation that takes
> 0.4seconds on IP1 and around 6 seconds on IP2, so I have been doing
> some micro-benchmarking to try and identify the hotspot. I've
> certainly found part of the problem.
>
> For those that are interested I've attached the very basic
> microbenchmarks I've been using. The nice thing is that in *general*
> IP2 does outperform IP1.
>
> The results that stand out in the other direction are:
>
> Using sets with custom classes (that define '__eq__', '__ne__' and
> '__hash__') seems to be 6 times slower in IronPython 2.
>
> Adding lists together is about 50% slower.
>
> Defining functions seems to be 25% slower and defining old style
> classes about 33% slower. (Creating instances of new style classes is
> massively faster though - thanks!)
>
> The code I used to test sets (sets2.py) is as follows:
>
> from System import DateTime
>
> class Thing(object):
> def __init__(self, val):
> self.val = val
> def __eq__(self, other):
> return self.val == other.val
>
> def __neq__(self):
> return not self.__eq__(other)
> def __hash__(self):
> return hash(self.val)
> def test(s):
> a = set()
> for i in xrange(100000):
> a.add(Thing(i))
> a.add(Thing(i+1))
> Thing(i) in a
> Thing(i+2) in a
> return (DateTime.Now -s).TotalMilliseconds
> s = DateTime.Now
> print test(s)
>
>
> Interestingly the time taken is exactly the same if I remove the
> definition of '__hash__'.
>
> The full set of results below:
>
> Results in milliseconds with a granularity of about 15ms and so an
> accuracy of +/- ~60ms.
> All testing with 10 000 000 operations unless otherwise stated.
>
> Empty loop (overhead):
> IP1: 421.9
> IP2: 438
> Create instance newstyle:
> IP1: 20360
> IP2: 1109
> Create instance oldstyle:
> IP1: 3766
> IP2: 3359
> Function call:
> IP1: 937
> IP2: 906
> Create function: 25% slower
> IP1: 2828
> IP2: 3640
> Define newstyle (1 000 000):
> IP1: 42047
> IP2: 20484
> Define oldstyle (1 000 000): 33% slower
> IP1: 1781
> IP2: 2671
>
> Comparing (== and !=):
> IP1: 278597
> IP2: 117662
> Sets (with numbers):
> IP1: 37095
> IP2: 30860
>
> Lists (10 000): 50% slower
> IP1: 10422
> IP2: 16109
>
> Recursion (10 000):
> IP1: 1125
> IP2: 1000
>
> Sets2 (100 000): 600% slower
> IP1: 4984
> IP2: 30547
>
>
> I'll be doing more as the 600% slow down for sets and the 50% slow
> down for lists accounts for some of the dependency analysis problem
> but not all of it.
>
> Many Thanks
>
> Michael Foord
> --
> http://www.resolversystems.com
> http://www.ironpythoninaction.com
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> Users at lists.ironpython.com
> http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com
--
http://www.ironpythoninaction.com/
http://www.voidspace.org.uk/
http://www.trypython.org/
http://www.ironpython.info/
http://www.resolverhacks.net/
http://www.theotherdelia.co.uk/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: ip2tests.zip
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 7272 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/ironpython-users/attachments/20080814/5b871dca/attachment.obj>
More information about the Ironpython-users
mailing list