String performance regression from python 3.2 to 3.3

rusi rustompmody at gmail.com
Wed Mar 13 11:11:18 CET 2013


On Mar 13, 3:07 pm, rusi <rustompm... at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 13, 2:36 pm, jmfauth <wxjmfa... at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > As a reply to rusi's comment:http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/browse_thread/thread/...
>
> > From string creation to the itertools usage. A medley. Some timings.
>
> > Important:
> > The real/absolute values of these experiments are not important. I do
> > not care and I'm not complaining at all.
>
> > These values are expected, I expected such values and they are only
> > confirming (*FOR ME*) my understanding of the coding of the characters
> > (and Unicode).
>
> > #~ py323                                      py330
>
> > #~ test   1:         0.015357737412819        0.019290216142579
> > #~ test   2:         0.015698801667198        0.020386269052436
> > #~ test   3:         0.015613338684288        0.018769561472500
> > #~ test   4:         0.023235297708529        0.032253414679390
> > #~ test   5:         0.023327062109534        0.029621391108935
> > #~ test   6:         1.119958127076760        1.095467665651482
> > #~ test   7:         0.420158472788311        0.565518010043673
> > #~ test   8:         0.649444234615974        1.061556978013171
> > #~ test   9:         0.712335144072079        1.211614222458175
> > #~ test  10:         0.704622996001357        1.160909074081441
> > #~ test  11:         0.614674584923621        1.053985430333688
> > #~ test  12:         0.660336235792764        1.059443246081010
> > #~ test  13:         4.821435927771570        5.795325214218677
> > #~ test  14:         0.494012668213403        0.729330462512273
> > #~ test  15:         0.504894429585788        0.879966255906103
> > #~ test  16:         0.693093370081103        1.132884304782264
> > #~ test  17:         0.749076743789461        3.013804437852462
> > #~ test  18:         7.467055989281286       13.387841650089342
> > #~ test  19:         7.581776062566778       13.593412812594643
> > #~ test  20:         9.477877493343140       15.235388291413805
> > #~ test  21:         0.022614608026196        0.020984116094176
> > #~ test  22:         6.685022041178975       12.687538276191944
> > #~ test  23:         6.946794763994170       12.986701250949636
> > #~ test  24:         0.097796827314760        0.156285014715777
> > #~ test  25:         0.024915807146677        0.034190706904894
> > #~ test  26:         0.024996544066013        0.032191582014335
> > #~ test  27:         0.000693943667684        0.001315421027272
> > #~ test  28:         0.000679765476967        0.001305968900141
> > #~ test  29:         0.001614344548152        0.025543979763000
> > #~ test  30:         0.000204008410812        0.000286714523313
> > #~ test  31:         0.000213460537964        0.000301286552656
> > #~ test  32:         0.000204008410819        0.000291440586878
> > #~ test  33:         0.249692904327539        0.497374474766957
> > #~ test  34:         0.248750448483740        0.513947598194790
> > #~ test  35:         0.099810130396032        0.249129715085319
>
> > jmf
>
> Thank you jmf. I believe that for the first time you have moved beyond
> a single point of complaint to a swathe of data points which evidently
> show performance regression.  You would need to provide data of what
> these tests 1-35 are.

Uhhh..
Making the subject line useful for all readers



More information about the Python-list mailing list