On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 5:06 PM, Ian Kelly <ian.g.ke...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 4:38 PM, Dan Stromberg <drsali...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Right now this all seems highly speculative to me. I think it might >>> be informative, either to you or to me, to do an actual timing test. >>> Why don't you try setting up two side-by-side installations of Python, >>> one with all the site-packages cruft, and one trimmed down to only >>> what you think should be in there, and see if you can measure a real >>> difference in startup time? >> >> In the original stackoverflow thread I mentioned, there's a speed >> comparison. > > That's just comparing using -S against not using -S, though. As I > understand it, you don't want to use -S; you still want to import site > but just want to pare down your site-packages for a speedup.
I ran a quick test where I copied my Python 2.5 installation on Windows and cleared out the site-packages folder and ran the test from the stackoverflow thread. With crufty site-packages: 0.18s With empty site-packages: 0.16s With -S (either installation): 0.10s So there does appear to be some improvement, but only a fraction of what I get by using -S. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
