[Python-Dev] Proposal for a common benchmark suite

Stefan Behnel stefan_ml at behnel.de
Thu Apr 28 23:10:08 CEST 2011


M.-A. Lemburg, 28.04.2011 22:23:
> Stefan Behnel wrote:
>> DasIch, 28.04.2011 20:55:
>>> the CPython
>>> benchmarks have an extensive set of microbenchmarks in the pybench
>>> package
>>
>> Try not to care too much about pybench. There is some value in it, but
>> some of its microbenchmarks are also tied to CPython's interpreter
>> behaviour. For example, the benchmarks for literals can easily be
>> considered dead code by other Python implementations so that they may
>> end up optimising the benchmarked code away completely, or at least
>> partially. That makes a comparison of the results somewhat pointless.
>
> The point of the micro benchmarks in pybench is to be able to compare
> them one-by-one, not by looking at the sum of the tests.
>
> If one implementation optimizes away some parts, then the comparison
> will show this fact very clearly - and that's the whole point.
>
> Taking the sum of the micro benchmarks only has some meaning
> as very rough indicator of improvement. That's why I wrote pybench:
> to get a better, more details picture of what's happening,
> rather than trying to find some way of measuring "average"
> use.
>
> This "average" is very different depending on where you look:
> for some applications method calls may be very important,
> for others, arithmetic operations, and yet others may have more
> need for fast attribute lookup.

I wasn't talking about "averages" or "sums", and I also wasn't trying to 
put down pybench in general. As it stands, it makes sense as a benchmark 
for CPython.

However, I'm arguing that a substantial part of it does not make sense as a 
benchmark for PyPy and others. With Cython, I couldn't get some of the 
literal arithmetic benchmarks to run at all. The runner script simply bails 
out with an error when the benchmarks accidentally run faster than the 
initial empty loop. I imagine that PyPy would eventually even drop the loop 
itself, thus leaving nothing to compare. Does that tell us that PyPy is 
faster than Cython for arithmetic? I don't think it does.

When I see that a benchmark shows that one implementation runs in 100% less 
time than another, I simply go *shrug* and look for a better benchmark to 
compare the two.

Stefan



More information about the Python-Dev mailing list