Re: [Cython] [cython-users] Re: Can we remove the FastGIL implementation?

2023-09-19 Thread da-woods
One more detail - on 0.29.x it becomes a pessimization in Python 3.10 rather than Python 3.11. So in conclusion         | Python <3.10    | Python 3.10 | Python 3.11 | Python 3.12b2 - 0.29.x  |

Re: [Cython] Can we remove the FastGIL implementation?

2023-09-19 Thread da-woods
I think the detail that was missing is you need to add the `#cython: fast_gil = True` to enable it. For me: Python 3.9 and 3.10 are basically identical (on master) **test_gil_already_held** with fast_gil Running the test... took 0.175062894821167 without Running the test... took 0.1097679138183

Re: [Cython] Can we remove the FastGIL implementation?

2023-09-19 Thread Lisandro Dalcin
Disclaimer: I may be doing something wrong, I did not put a lot of effort into it. With the microbenchmark that was offered in the GH issue, I see little difference. Use the attached zip file to reproduce yourself. Change tox.ini to "cython<3" to try 0.29.x. BTW, in the 0.29.x case, I see no compil

[Cython] Can we remove the FastGIL implementation?

2023-09-19 Thread Stefan Behnel
Hi, I've seen reports that Cython's "FastGIL" implementation (which basically keeps the GIL state in a thread-local variable) is no longer faster than CPython's plain GIL implementation in recent Python 3.x versions. Potentially even slower. See the report in https://github.com/cython/cython