You don’t say how long you are trying to sleep for or why you want to sleep, but every time you call Sleep you abandon the rest of your timeslice. If you are trying to sleep for a few milliseconds you may be suprised by how long you actually sleep as your thread has to be rescheduled after the sleep time expires. I haven’t needed to check this on Windows 8 but a few years ago we found that on Windows 7 the minimum sleep time was about 15mS – one system timer tick. In fact I believe this minimum can be shorter if there are no other threads of the same or higher priority are waiting to run but we didn’t notice this happening. Sleep is fine for arbitrary length waits of several hundred milliseconds or more but is useless for accurate timing and doesn’t work properly for short timeouts.
Andy Graham From: Slide Sent: Monday, January 19, 2015 10:27 PM To: ironpython-users@python.org Subject: [Ironpython-users] time.sleep slowdown We're seeing some weirdness in some embedded scripting. Some of our scripts have calls to time.sleep(), with these calls in place, from run to run of the script, performance drops significantly, but if we remove these calls, we don't see any slowdown. The sleep function is implemented with a call to Thread.Sleep, so I am not sure why this would slow things down so much. Has anyone seen anything like this, and have a way to overcome it? Thanks, slide -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ Ironpython-users mailing list Ironpython-users@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/ironpython-users
_______________________________________________ Ironpython-users mailing list Ironpython-users@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/ironpython-users
