[Grok-dev] Grok, python 2.6 and unladen-swallow
sebastian at urbantalk.se
Mon Sep 21 09:30:46 EDT 2009
Thanks for the info, I'll keep my expectations low then. I saw the
impressive improvements in Pickle and was thinking that it would speed
up Zodb access, but obviously it doesn't have to give any practical
improvements. I haven't profiled any of my apps in detail so I don't
even know were potential bottlenecks might be (Grok is fast enough as
is). A larger memory footprint will obviously have a negative impact,
so I hope they will address that during their next iterations.
On 21 sep 2009, at 13.45, Hanno Schlichting wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 12:19 PM, Sebastian Ware <sebastian at urbantalk.se
> > wrote:
>> Having looked at some of the performance data of unladen-swallow
>> It would seem to bring huge performance benefits to Grok apps,
>> especially when using Zodb-style backends. When is it reasonable to
>> expect Grok to support python 2.6?
> I tested repoze.bfg, Zope2 and Plone against unladen swallow (at
> various points during their Q2 and Q3 development). There was no
> noticeable performance improvement in any of those. Even when running
> with "-j always" which means everything is JIT-compiled, you only got
> a massively increased memory consumption but no real speed-up.
> I'm afraid unladen swallow won't be a magic bullet making things
> faster. Not unless they actually implement some real performance
> optimization strategies for their LLVM code generation.
> I tried profile based optimizations as found in gcc 4.4 as well at
> some point and couldn't find any real improvements either. It seems
> there are no simple optimizations that apply to large Zope based
> applications, but it is sheer complexity and amount of code that is
> slowing it down in the end. If you want to go faster by a large
> margin, you need to do less and not the same stuff slightly faster.
More information about the Grok-dev