Hello Maciej,
Mmm, too bad. Thankfully, with PyPy 2.6.0, speed is about the same as for
CPython. PyPy 2.2.1 was significantly slower.
In any case, thanks for trying out the strbuf optimization. I'm sure it
will be helpful for other applications. And we can rule this out as the
cause of the low performance with RinohType.
I've made some changes to make RinohType more suitable for benchmarking.
You can find it here:
branch pypy_benchmark of g...@github.com:brechtm/rinohtype.git
Simply run benchmark_pypy.sh (and benchmark_python.sh).
You can change the length of the document by changing the 'repeat'
parameter in examples/rfic2009/template.xml
For repeat=500, PyPy 2.6.0 is about as fast as CPython 2.7.9
For repeat=5000, PyPy = 214s and CPython = 227s
If you think this benchmark is useful, please include it in
http://speed.pypy.org
Let me know if there's anything else I can do.
Cheers,
Brecht
On Wed, 05 Aug 2015 09:52:23 +0200, Maciej Fijalkowski <fij...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Hi Brecht
We tried the strbuf with rinohtype and (after warmup) it's the speed
of cpython, which is bad.
investigating some more....
On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 12:34 AM, Brecht Machiels <bre...@mos6581.org>
wrote:
Hello,
I've managed to backport RinohType to Python 2 (took me only a couple
of hours thankfully).
Results on my Celeron T3000 (Arch Linux x86_64):
CPython 3.3.4 14 s
PyPy3 2.1.0-beta1 61 s
CPython 2.7.6 15 s
PyPy 2.2.1 35 s
If you want to give it a try (no external dependencies):
git clone --branch pypy2 https://github.com/brechtm/rinohtype.git
cd rinohtype/examples/rfic2009
rm -rf template.ptc; PYTHONPATH=../.. pypy template.py
While PyPy2 performs better than PyPy3, it's still much slower than
CPython. Is RinohType hitting a weak spot in PyPy? Any hints on what I
can do to improve performance?
Best regards,
Brecht
_______________________________________________
pypy-dev mailing list
pypy-dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pypy-dev
