M.-A. Lemburg wrote: > On 2008-02-07 14:09, Andrew MacIntyre wrote: >> Probably in response to the same stimulus as Christian it occurred to me >> that the freelist approach had been adopted long before PyMalloc was >> enabled as standard (in 2.3), and that much of the performance gains >> between 2.2 and 2.3 were in fact due to PyMalloc. > > One of the hopes of having a custom allocator for Python was to be > able to get rid off all free lists. For some reason that never happened. > Not sure why. People were probably too busy with adding new > features to the language at the time ;-)
Very probably ;-) > Something you could try to make PyMalloc perform better for the builtin > types is to check the actual size of the allocated PyObjects and then > make sure that PyMalloc uses arenas large enough to hold a good quantity > of them, e.g. it's possible that the float types fall into the same > arena as some other type and thus don't have enough "room" to use > as free list. Like MvL, I doubt it. Uncle Timmy did a pretty thorough nose-clean on PyMalloc. However, my tests do show that something is funny with the current freelist implementation for floats on at least 2 platforms, and that doing without that sort of optimisation for float objects would likely not be a hardship with PyMalloc. -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Andrew I MacIntyre "These thoughts are mine alone..." E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (pref) | Snail: PO Box 370 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (alt) | Belconnen ACT 2616 Web: http://www.andymac.org/ | Australia _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com