[issue6216] Raise Unicode KEEPALIVE_SIZE_LIMIT from 9 to 32?

Antoine Pitrou pit...@free.fr added the comment: Closing as outdated. There are no freelists anymore in the unicode implementation. -- resolution: - out of date stage: - committed/rejected status: open - closed ___ Python tracker

[issue6216] Raise Unicode KEEPALIVE_SIZE_LIMIT from 9 to 32?

Terry J. Reedy tjre...@udel.edu added the comment: Two weeks left for 3.2 ;-) -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue6216 ___ ___

[issue6216] Raise Unicode KEEPALIVE_SIZE_LIMIT from 9 to 32?

Marc-Andre Lemburg m...@egenix.com added the comment: I'm interested in getting this into 3.2. Thanks for bringing the issue back on my radar. -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue6216

[issue6216] Raise Unicode KEEPALIVE_SIZE_LIMIT from 9 to 32?

Mark Lawrence breamore...@yahoo.co.uk added the comment: Terry, are you still interested in this? -- nosy: +BreamoreBoy versions: +Python 3.2 ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue6216

[issue6216] Raise Unicode KEEPALIVE_SIZE_LIMIT from 9 to 32?

Terry J. Reedy tjre...@udel.edu added the comment: That question should better be directed at Marc-Andre. I merely extracted this sub-issue from one of his posts in the very contentious discussion of #1943, lest it get lost. Antoine asked for a calculation. Marc-Andre gave one, but I do not

[issue6216] Raise Unicode KEEPALIVE_SIZE_LIMIT from 9 to 32?

Antoine Pitrou pit...@free.fr added the comment: You forgot 2) show impact on a couple of benchmarks of his choice, which is arguably the most important. -- versions: -Python 3.1 ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org

[issue6216] Raise Unicode KEEPALIVE_SIZE_LIMIT from 9 to 32?

Terry J. Reedy tjre...@udel.edu added the comment: I did not forget. I omitted because there were no benchmarks to mention. I admit that silence is sometimes difficult to interpret and that I should have said so. Do you see that incrementing the limit could have negative effects that need to

[issue6216] Raise Unicode KEEPALIVE_SIZE_LIMIT from 9 to 32?

Antoine Pitrou pit...@free.fr added the comment: I did not forget. I omitted because there were no benchmarks to mention. I admit that silence is sometimes difficult to interpret and that I should have said so. Do you see that incrementing the limit could have negative effects that need to

[issue6216] Raise Unicode KEEPALIVE_SIZE_LIMIT from 9 to 32?

Marc-Andre Lemburg m...@egenix.com added the comment: I think we should also consider raising the free list limit of currently 1024 objects. The keep-alive optimization currently uses at most 1024 * 9 * 2 = 18432 bytes (+ pymalloc overhead) on a UCS2 build of Python in the worst case. With a

[issue6216] Raise Unicode KEEPALIVE_SIZE_LIMIT from 9 to 32?

Terry J. Reedy tjre...@udel.edu added the comment: If you write a patch, you are free to include the additional change. -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue6216 ___

[issue6216] Raise Unicode KEEPALIVE_SIZE_LIMIT from 9 to 32?

Antoine Pitrou pit...@free.fr added the comment: I'm not sure it is as non-controversial as it seems. Someone should 1) do the math 2) show impact on a couple of benchmarks of his choice -- nosy: +pitrou ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org

[issue6216] Raise Unicode KEEPALIVE_SIZE_LIMIT from 9 to 32?

New submission from Terry J. Reedy tjre...@udel.edu: From msg88801 ''' for 3.1: raising the KEEPALIVE_SIZE_LIMIT to 32 as explained and motivated here: msg64215 That's a simple non-disruptive change which makes a lot of sense due to the advances in CPU designs in the last 9 years. I determined

[issue6216] Raise Unicode KEEPALIVE_SIZE_LIMIT from 9 to 32?

Terry J. Reedy tjre...@udel.edu added the comment: Marc-Andre Lemburg's message is from #1943 -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue6216 ___