[Python-Dev] Python Benchmarks

[Fredrik Lundh]

M.-A. Lemburg wrote:

> Still, here's the timeit.py measurement of the PythonFunctionCall
> test (note that I've scaled down the test in terms of number
> of rounds for timeit.py):
> 
> Python 2.4:
> 10 loops, best of 3: 21.9 msec per loop
> 10 loops, best of 3: 21.8 msec per loop
> 10 loops, best of 3: 21.8 msec per loop
> 10 loops, best of 3: 21.9 msec per loop
> 10 loops, best of 3: 21.9 msec per loop
> 
> Python 2.5 as of last night:
> 100 loops, best of 3: 18 msec per loop
> 100 loops, best of 3: 18.4 msec per loop
> 100 loops, best of 3: 18.4 msec per loop
> 100 loops, best of 3: 18.2 msec per loop
> 
> The pybench 2.0 result:
> 
> PythonFunctionCalls:   130ms   108ms  +21.3%   132ms   109ms  +20.9%
> 
> Looks about right, I'd say.

except for the sign, I'd say.

pybench reported a slowdown from 108 to 130 ms, which prompted you to write

     > A little disturbing is the slow-down for Python function calls
     > and the built-in method lookup. Did anything change in these parts
     > of the interpreter ?

but timeit is reporting a ~20% speedup (21.8 to 18 ms).  on my machine, 
using the loop body from Calls.PythonFunctionCalls.test as a separate 
global function called by timeit, I get:

     25 usec per loop for Python 2.4.3
     22.5 usec per loop for Python 2.5 trunk

which seems to match your timeit results quite well.  and we *did* speed 
up frame handling on the reykjavik sprint.

another sprint optimization was exception handling, and pybench did 
notice this (137 to 115 ms).  here's what timeit says on my machine:

     15.1 usec per loop for Python 2.4.3
     23.5 usec per loop for Python 2.5 alpha 2
     11.6 usec per loop for Python 2.5 trunk

something's not quite right...

</F>