[issue8995] Performance issue with multiprocessing queue (3.1 VS 2.6)

Antoine Pitrou added the comment: -> 2.6: ('Using queue.Queue with small data: ', 0.77207708358764648) ('Using queue.Queue with huge data : ', 0.78139781951904297) ('Using multiprocessing.Queue with small data : ', 3.5506501197814941) ('Using multiprocessing.Queue with h

[issue8995] Performance issue with multiprocessing queue (3.1 VS 2.6)

Charles-Francois Natali added the comment: Could you try with Python 3.2 ? In 3.1, the only available pickle implementation was in pure python: with cPickle (2.7) or _pickle (3.2), it should be much faster. -- nosy: +neologix ___ Python tracker

[issue8995] Performance issue with multiprocessing queue (3.1 VS 2.6)

Jesse Noller added the comment: No - I don't know of anything which would trigger this in 3.1 off the top of my head. The performance degradation is pretty worrisome -- ___ Python tracker _

[issue8995] Performance issue with multiprocessing queue (3.1 VS 2.6)

Changes by Antoine Pitrou : -- assignee: -> jnoller nosy: +jnoller versions: +Python 2.7, Python 3.2 ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python

[issue8995] Performance issue with multiprocessing queue (3.1 VS 2.6)

New submission from Bob : Hi, I've found a strange performance issue when comparing queue.queue and multiprocessing.queue in python 2.6 and 3.1 My program creates a queue, and do 1 million put and get operations on either a small data or a "big" array. My code: (This is the 3.1 version. Swit