Program uses twice as much memory in Python 3.6 than in Python 3.5

Chris Angelico rosuav at gmail.com
Wed Mar 29 23:31:13 EDT 2017


On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 2:19 PM, Rick Johnson
<rantingrickjohnson at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wednesday, March 29, 2017 at 8:17:01 PM UTC-5, Jan Gosmann wrote:
>> On 29 Mar 2017, at 20:12, Steve D'Aprano wrote:
>>
>> > If you can demonstrate this effect using simple example
>> > code without the external dependencies (using nothing but
>> > the standard library) and people can replicate it, I think
>> > it should be reported as a bug.
>>
>> I probably won't be able to demonstrate the effect with
>> simple example code because I haven't the slightest idea
>> what is causing it. Also, I'm not sure how much more time I
>> want to invest in this. After all it is a problem that
>> might never get noticed by any users of the software.
>
> Really? How could your clients not notice 60 GB of memory
> usage unless they are running some kind of mad-dog insane
> top-of-the-line hardware? (Got Benjamins???) Of course, in
> the case they are not DARPA scientist supported by a
> viturally unlimited supply of tax dollars provided by the
> endless toils of American slave-bots, how could they ignore
> the thrashing? o_O

Did you read the project's README? This is a dramatic reduction from
the normal memory usage of this kind of job. So, yes, they *are* going
to have top-of-the-line hardware. If you're doing a job that normally
would require 256GB of RAM, and instead of being able to run in 40GB,
it needs 60GB, are you going to notice? You probably have 64GB or
128GB.

ChrisA


More information about the Python-list mailing list