Message259544
| Author | vstinner |
|---|---|
| Recipients | brett.cannon, florin.papa, pitrou, serhiy.storchaka, vstinner, yselivanov, zbyrne |
| Date | 2016-02-04.08:39:51 |
| SpamBayes Score | -1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified | Yes |
| Message-id | <1454575191.59.0.818374659825.issue26275@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content | |
|---|---|
> With patch: > python performance/bm_json_v2.py -n 10 --timer perf_counter Oh. There is a bit of confusion here. You must *not* run directly bm_xxx.py scripts. The calibration is done in perf.py. Try for example: python perf.py python2 python3 -b json_dump_v2 You must see something like: Calibrating => num_runs=10, num_loops=16 (0.50 sec < 0.55 sec) I should maybe share the calibration code to also compute the number of iterations when a bm_xxx.py script is run directly? But the risk is that someone compares two runs of bm_xxx.py using two python binaries, and seeing different results just because the number of calibrated loops is different... |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2016-02-04 08:39:51 | vstinner | set | recipients: + vstinner, brett.cannon, pitrou, serhiy.storchaka, yselivanov, zbyrne, florin.papa |
| 2016-02-04 08:39:51 | vstinner | set | messageid: <1454575191.59.0.818374659825.issue26275@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2016-02-04 08:39:51 | vstinner | link | issue26275 messages |
| 2016-02-04 08:39:51 | vstinner | create | |