[pypy-dev] funding/popularity?

Miquel Torres tobami at googlemail.com
Wed Dec 22 09:24:28 CET 2010

Mmm, yes, it appears that the memory is not properly freed. I can try
experimenting by destroying the dom element and recreating it each
time that the plot changes...

Btw., instead of continuing here "polluting" the pypy-dev mailing
list, we can move to http://groups.google.com/group/codespeed if

Thanks for reporting this.


2010/12/22 Dima Tisnek <dimaqq at gmail.com>:
> I sort of figured it out, although I don't have a ready solution.
> This affects opera 11, stable ff, ff 4.0b7; amazingly it does not affect ie8.
> Basically memory consumption of the plot appears to be proportional to
> plot area.
> Normal plot that you get by default at
> http://speed.pypy.org/comparison/ costs about 100M of browser memory
> consumption:
> opera 130M, stable ff 70M, beta ff 90M at window size 1680x1050;
> opera  80M, stable ff 55M, beta ff 70M at window size 1024x600;
> Switching to "horizontal" produces a tall plot of same width and costs
> about 300~700M of browser memory:
> opera 720M, stable ff 370M, beta ff 370M at window wize 1680x1050;
> opera 350M, stable ff 370M, beta ff 370M at window size 1024x600;
> Suprisingly window size only matters while javascript produces the
> plot, and not when window is resized, even though plot it resized with
> the window correctly.
> This alone is pretty heavy, but doesn't grind the browser.
> What really grinds is that every time you change a tickbox on the
> left, a plot is redrawn and another 200M of browser memory is wasted.
> This is not double buffering, as next change adds yet another 200M or
> so and so on, it appears that either js doesn't free something, or
> browser caches or saves the previous page state.
> As memory consumption grows, at some point browser hits the wall,
> causes heavy swapping for some time, and I think garbage collection,
> because practical (but not virtual) memory usage first drops to
> something like 20~50M and then returns to "normal" 300M.
> opera ~30 seconds, stable ff about a minute, beta ff several minutes
> (total system mem 1G, cpu Atom @1.6GHz)
> Perhaps OS also plays a role in the grind, as it is clearly swapping
> and swaps out too much? or triggers gc too late and gc has to pull the
> pages back from disk to perform collection?
> ie8 doesn't use that much memory, as a matter of fact memory
> consumption starts little (40M) and changes very little (only +10M) if
> you go to horizonatal view; the price is very slow rendering, more
> than 10 seconds per column change.
> I'll post this on firefox bugzilla too, let's see if someone has a solution.
> Meanwhile perhaps pypy speed center could start with a smaller plot
> area (or fewer columns as that makes horizontal plot smaller) to
> accomodate varying hardware and system mem usage that users might
> have?
> The simplest would be a warning next to "horizontal" checkbox.
> On 21 December 2010 01:06, Miquel Torres <tobami at googlemail.com> wrote:
>> Hi Dima,
>>> another temp problem with speed pypy is that it's terrubly slow in ff
>>> beta. it also occasionally grinds in stable ff and opera, but I guess
>>> this can be forgiven for the sake of simplicity / developer effort.
>> Well, speed.pypy is actually fast in all modern browsers. The problem
>> you are referring to is probably caused by a bug in the javascript
>> plotting library (jqPplot) that is triggered in the comparison view
>> when there are some results with 0 values. It only appears for some
>> plot types, but it is very annoying because it grinds the browser to a
>> halt like you say. Is that what you meant?
>> We are looking into it, and will fix that library if necessary.
>> Cheers,
>> Miquel
>> 2010/12/21 Dima Tisnek <dimaqq at gmail.com>:
>>> On 20 December 2010 19:21, William ML Leslie
>>> <william.leslie.ttg at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On 21 December 2010 11:59, Dima Tisnek <dimaqq at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> More visibility for performance achievements would do
>>>>> good too.
>>>> Where are pypy's performance achievements *not* visible, but should be?
>>> for example http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/
>>> doesn't say which pypy version is used, what options, doesn't have
>>> performance figures for multithreaded/multicore
>>> also benchmarks are kinda small, most of them are not docuemented, and
>>> I couldn't find any info if the same python code was used for cpython
>>> and pypy (both shootout and speed pypy) or interpreter-specific
>>> verions were used, that is each tweaked for best performance given the
>>> known tradeoffs for each implementation.further the most standard
>>> benchmarks, pystone, etc. completely ignore the fact that real world
>>> programs are large and only a few small paths are execured often.
>>> another temp problem with speed pypy is that it's terrubly slow in ff
>>> beta. it also occasionally grinds in stable ff and opera, but I guess
>>> this can be forgiven for the sake of simplicity / developer effort.
>>> if you google for 'python performance' you don't get a single link to
>>> pypy on the first page, as a matter of fact, codespeak is poorly
>>> indexed, it took me quite some time to get some of my questions
>>> answered with a search. also if you look up 'pypy gc' you get a page
>>> on codespeak, but to interpret what the data actually means is so far
>>> beyond me.
>>> a good overview is found in the mainling list
>>> http://codespeak.net/pipermail/pypy-dev/2010q1/005757.html then again
>>> slowspitfire and spambayes bits are outdated by now.
>>> the definitive good thing about pypy is that it's much easier to find
>>> out about its inner workings than that of cpython!
>>> hopefully a bit more of end-user stuff get known.
>>> let's call it pypy public outreach (feature request)
>>>>> Sidetracking... one day when pypy jit/gc/etc are all worked out, how
>>>>> hard would it be to use same techniques and most of backends for some
>>>>> unrelated language that doesn't have jit yet, e.g. php?
>>>> You know that pypy already has implementations of other languages,
>>>> right - Scheme, Javascript, Prolog, IO and smallTalk? They aren't
>>>> integrated with the translated pypy-c, but they show that it is not
>>>> too difficult to write a runtime for any dynamic language you choose.
>>> Oh I didn't know there were so many, and I mistakenly though that js
>>> was a target, not implmented langauge. In any case I read somewhere
>>> that js support was retired...
>>>>> And how hard
>>>>> would it be to marry two dynamic languages, so that modules from one
>>>>> could be used in the other? Or that modules written in rpython could
>>>>> be used in several langs?
>>>> It's in the "interesting problems" bucket, and the effort required
>>>> depends on the level of integration between languages you want.  There
>>>> are several projects already attempting to do decent integration
>>>> between several languages, besides the approach used on the JVM, there
>>>> are also GNU Guile, Racket, and Parrot, among others.  It might be
>>>> worth waiting to see how these different projects pan out, before
>>>> spending a bunch of effort just to be an also-ran in the
>>>> multi-language runtime market.
>>>> However, implementing more languages in rpython has the side-effect of
>>>> propagating the l * o * p problem: it introduces more and more
>>>> implementations that then have to be maintained, so good
>>>> cross-language integration probably belongs /outside/ pypy itself, so
>>>> existing runtimes can hook into it.
>>> Makes perfect sense, after all any given other language hardly has the
>>> same data model as python.
>>>> But it would be an interesting experiment (to marry the various
>>>> interpreters pypy ships with), if you wanted to try it.
>>>> My two cents.
>>>> --
>>>> William Leslie
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> pypy-dev at codespeak.net
>>> http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/pypy-dev

More information about the Pypy-dev mailing list