IronPython displays it when it starts up on the first line: "... on .NET 2.0.50727.3031"
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Foord Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2008 2:34 PM To: Discussion of IronPython Subject: Re: [IronPython] Performance of IronPython 2 Beta 4 and IronPython 1 Curt Hagenlocher wrote: > Can you tell us about the environment you're running these tests in? > Most interesting are the specific OS and the version of mscorwks.dll. > It's Win XP SP 3. What's the easiest way of telling you the specific version of mscorwks.dll? I'll get you more details from work tomorrow. Michael > On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 9:41 AM, Michael Foord > <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: > > Just for fun I also compared with CPython. The results are > interesting, I'll turn it into a blog post of course... > > > Results in milliseconds with a granularity of about 15ms and so an > accuracy of +/- ~60ms. > All testing with 10 000 000 operations unless otherwise stated. > > The version of Python I compared against was Python 2.4. > > Empty loop (overhead): > IP1: 422 > IP2: 438 > Py: 3578 > > Create instance newstyle: > IP1: 20360 > IP2: 1109 > Py: 4063 > > Create instance oldstyle: > IP1: 3766 > IP2: 3359 > Py: 4797 > > Function call: > IP1: 937 > IP2: 906 > Py: 3313 > > Create function: 25% slower > IP1: 2828 > IP2: 3640 > Py: 2766 > > Define newstyle (1 000 000): > IP1: 42047 > IP2: 20484 > Py: 23921 > > Define oldstyle (1 000 000): 33% slower > IP1: 1781 > IP2: 2671 > Py: 2108 > > > Comparing (== and !=): > IP1: 278597 > IP2: 117662 > Py: 62423 > Sets: > IP1: 37095 > IP2: 30860 > Py: 8047 > > > Lists (10 000): 50% slower > IP1: 10422 > IP2: 16109 > Py: 6094 > > > Recursion (10 000): > IP1: 1125 > IP2: 1000 > Py: 3609 > > Sets2 (100 000): 500% slower > IP1: 4984 > IP2: 30547 > Py: 1203 > > func_with_args: > IP1: 6312 > IP2: 5906 > Py: 11250 > > method_with_args: > IP1: 20594 > IP2: 11813 > Py: 14875 > method_with_kwargs: > IP1: 27953 > IP2: 11187 > Py: 20032 > import: 15% slower > IP1: 28469 > IP2: 32000 > Py: 25782 > > global: 20% slower > IP1: 1047 > IP2: 1203 > Py: 4141 > > Exceptions (100000): 40% slower > IP1: 4703 > IP2: 6125 > Py: 266 > Engine execution: 8000% slower!! > IP1: 1600 > IP2: 115002 > > > Michael Foord wrote: > > Hello all, > > I've ported Resolver One to run on IronPython 2 Beta 4 to > check for any potential problems (we will only do a *proper* > port once IP 2 is out of beta). > > The basic porting was straightforward and several bugs have > been fixed since IP 2 B3 - many thanks to the IronPython team. > > The good news is that Resolver One is only 30-50% slower than > Resolver One on IronPython 1! (It was 300 - 400% slower on top > of IP 2 B3.) Resolver One is fairly heavily optimised around > the performance hotspots of IronPython 1, so we expect to have > to do a fair bit of profiling and refactoring to readjust to > the performance profile of IP 2. > > Having said that, there are a few oddities (and the areas that > slow down vary tremendously depending on which spreadsheet we > use to benchmark it - making it fairly difficult to track down > the hotspots). > > We have one particular phase of spreadsheet calculation that > takes 0.4seconds on IP1 and around 6 seconds on IP2, so I have > been doing some micro-benchmarking to try and identify the > hotspot. I've certainly found part of the problem. > > For those that are interested I've attached the very basic > microbenchmarks I've been using. The nice thing is that in > *general* IP2 does outperform IP1. > > The results that stand out in the other direction are: > > Using sets with custom classes (that define '__eq__', '__ne__' > and '__hash__') seems to be 6 times slower in IronPython 2. > > Adding lists together is about 50% slower. > > Defining functions seems to be 25% slower and defining old > style classes about 33% slower. (Creating instances of new > style classes is massively faster though - thanks!) > > The code I used to test sets (sets2.py) is as follows: > > from System import DateTime > > class Thing(object): > def __init__(self, val): > self.val = val > def __eq__(self, other): > return self.val == other.val > > def __neq__(self): > return not self.__eq__(other) > def __hash__(self): > return hash(self.val) > def test(s): > a = set() > for i in xrange(100000): > a.add(Thing(i)) > a.add(Thing(i+1)) > Thing(i) in a > Thing(i+2) in a > return (DateTime.Now -s).TotalMilliseconds > s = DateTime.Now > print test(s) > > > Interestingly the time taken is exactly the same if I remove > the definition of '__hash__'. > > The full set of results below: > > Results in milliseconds with a granularity of about 15ms and > so an accuracy of +/- ~60ms. > All testing with 10 000 000 operations unless otherwise stated. > > Empty loop (overhead): > IP1: 421.9 > IP2: 438 > Create instance newstyle: > IP1: 20360 > IP2: 1109 > Create instance oldstyle: > IP1: 3766 > IP2: 3359 > Function call: > IP1: 937 > IP2: 906 > Create function: 25% slower > IP1: 2828 > IP2: 3640 > Define newstyle (1 000 000): > IP1: 42047 > IP2: 20484 > Define oldstyle (1 000 000): 33% slower > IP1: 1781 > IP2: 2671 > > Comparing (== and !=): > IP1: 278597 > IP2: 117662 > Sets (with numbers): > IP1: 37095 > IP2: 30860 > > Lists (10 000): 50% slower > IP1: 10422 > IP2: 16109 > > Recursion (10 000): > IP1: 1125 > IP2: 1000 > Sets2 (100 000): 600% slower > IP1: 4984 > IP2: 30547 > > > I'll be doing more as the 600% slow down for sets and the 50% > slow down for lists accounts for some of the dependency > analysis problem but not all of it. > > Many Thanks > > Michael Foord > -- > http://www.resolversystems.com <http://www.resolversystems.com/> > http://www.ironpythoninaction.com > <http://www.ironpythoninaction.com/> > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list > Users@lists.ironpython.com <mailto:Users@lists.ironpython.com> > http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com > > > > -- > http://www.ironpythoninaction.com/ > http://www.voidspace.org.uk/ > http://www.trypython.org/ > http://www.ironpython.info/ > http://www.resolverhacks.net/ > http://www.theotherdelia.co.uk/ > > > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list > Users@lists.ironpython.com <mailto:Users@lists.ironpython.com> > http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list > Users@lists.ironpython.com > http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com > -- http://www.ironpythoninaction.com/ http://www.voidspace.org.uk/ http://www.trypython.org/ http://www.ironpython.info/ http://www.theotherdelia.co.uk/ http://www.resolverhacks.net/ _______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users@lists.ironpython.com http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com Sample disclaimer text _______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users@lists.ironpython.com http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com
