When I first started benchmarking one of my Django sites,
http://trip-travel.ru/ (using postgres driver pypq),
I was disappointed by the results. PyPy was visually much slower than
cPython (I just looked at how the site loads in the browser)
But today I got some incredible results, I finally made PyPy to work
faster than cPython, and found out that it got faster after loading the
page several hundred times with "ab" or "siege"
Here a the results, of mean response time by querying the home page with
apache's "ab" (cPython 2.7.2, Django 1.3, PyPy 1.6.0), served with
cherrypy wsgi server:
After 10 requests (excluding the first request):
cPython - 163.529 ms
PyPy - 460.879 ms
50 request more:
cPython - 168.539
PyPy - 249.850
100 requests more:
cPython - 166.278 ms
PyPy - 131.104
100 requests more:
cPython - 165.820
PyPy - 115.446
300 requests more:
cPython - 165.543
PyPy - 107.636
300 requests more:
cPython - 166.425
PyPy - 103.065
As we can see, the JIT needs much time to warm up, but when it does, the
result is pretty noticeable.
By the way, with psycopg2, the site responds for 155.766 ms in average
(only 10 ms faster), so using PyPy with Django makes much sense for me.
As for now, pypy cannot run with uWSGI, which I use in production, but
maybe i'll switch to PyPy for production deployments if "PyPy + PyPQ +
Some pure python WSGI server" suite will outperform (uWSGI + cPython +
psycopg2). Though, the need to load the page 500 times after each server
reload is not comfortable.
<http://trip-travel.ru/>
_______________________________________________
pypy-dev mailing list
pypy-dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pypy-dev
