PyPy http://pypy.org is an alternative implementation of Python primarily focused on performance. During a very rough benchmark I made with CosmeticChangesToolkit and a few pages, it didn't provide significant speed improvements, but it did work. Have you ever tested PyPy or used it in production? Given the importance that MediaWiki people have recently given to HHVM, what do you think we could/should do on the performance side of the framework?
On 2 January 2015 at 12:10, Ricordisamoa ricordisamoa@openmailbox.org wrote:
Given the importance that MediaWiki people have recently given to HHVM, what do you think we could/should do on the performance side of the framework?
Our main bottleneck is a social one: the limit on the number of changes per minute is not dictated by the interpreter, nor by mediawiki, but by the community. This is not true for bots that read much more than they write, but for those bots, the network connection (rather than the interpreter) is the limiting factor.
And then the question is: does it provide enough benefit for the additional maintenance cost? Based on this analysis, I'm inclined to say no.
Merlijn
On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 6:10 PM, Ricordisamoa ricordisamoa@openmailbox.org wrote:
PyPy is an alternative implementation of Python primarily focused on performance. During a very rough benchmark I made with CosmeticChangesToolkit and a few pages, it didn't provide significant speed improvements, but it did work. Have you ever tested PyPy or used it in production?
What tool did you use to do benchmarking, and can you share the results?
Il 02/01/2015 14:07, John Mark Vandenberg ha scritto:
On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 6:10 PM, Ricordisamoa ricordisamoa@openmailbox.org wrote:
PyPy is an alternative implementation of Python primarily focused on performance. During a very rough benchmark I made with CosmeticChangesToolkit and a few pages, it didn't provide significant speed improvements, but it did work. Have you ever tested PyPy or used it in production?
What tool did you use to do benchmarking, and can you share the results?
I used this self-made gist https://gist.github.com/ricordisamoa/974cb831d048ca42a784 ;-)
Here are the results: PyPy 2.3.1 with GCC 4.9.0 (Python 2.7.6): 11.888333 seconds CPython (Python 2.7.8): 12.732752 seconds
You will also need to 'diff' the 'cpython' and 'pypy' folders to ensure that PyPy applied cosmetic changes correctly.
Thanks.
Which GCC is your CPython compiled for? Also GCC 4.9.0 ?
What would be especially useful is if we can determine which methods are performing vastly slower on CPython vs PyPy for that workload.
On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 8:45 PM, Ricordisamoa ricordisamoa@openmailbox.org wrote:
Il 02/01/2015 14:07, John Mark Vandenberg ha scritto:
On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 6:10 PM, Ricordisamoa ricordisamoa@openmailbox.org wrote:
PyPy is an alternative implementation of Python primarily focused on performance. During a very rough benchmark I made with CosmeticChangesToolkit and a few pages, it didn't provide significant speed improvements, but it did work. Have you ever tested PyPy or used it in production?
What tool did you use to do benchmarking, and can you share the results?
I used this self-made gist ;-)
Here are the results: PyPy 2.3.1 with GCC 4.9.0 (Python 2.7.6): 11.888333 seconds CPython (Python 2.7.8): 12.732752 seconds
You will also need to 'diff' the 'cpython' and 'pypy' folders to ensure that PyPy applied cosmetic changes correctly.
Pywikipedia-l mailing list Pywikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/pywikipedia-l
pywikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org