Marc-Andre Lemburg <m...@egenix.com> added the comment: Marc-Andre Lemburg wrote: > > Marc-Andre Lemburg <m...@egenix.com> added the comment: > > Christian Heimes wrote: >> Marc-Andre: >> Have you profiled your suggestion? I'm interested in the speed implications. >> My gut feeling is that your idea could be slower, since you have added more >> instructions to a tight loop, that is execute on every lookup, insert, >> update and deletion of a dict key. The hash modification could have a >> smaller impact, since the hash is cached. I'm merely speculating here until >> we have some numbers to compare. > > I haven't done any profiling on this yet, but will run some > tests.
I ran pybench and pystone: neither shows a significant change. I wish we had a simple to run benchmark based on Django to allow checking such changes against real world applications. Not that I expect different results from such a benchmark... To check the real world impact, I guess it would be best to run a few websites with the patch for a week and see whether the collision exception gets raised. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue13703> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
