Kristján Valur Jónsson added the comment: Serhiy, to answer your questions:
> Can you please measure the time of unmarshalling? Sure. Normally, I wouldn't consider time to be important here because for code objects, unmarshaling is done only once per run However, testing it is simple: I added timeit(number=100) for unmarshaling of the different version code. 0.09614 0.09605 0.582672 0.553599 0.05590 0.05628 0.293370 0.285517 0.05703 0.05754 0.294601 0.292070 The lines are version 2, 3, and 4(*) respectively. The columns are test_marshal.py, recode.intern(test_marshal.py), decimal.py and recode.intern(decimal.py) As you see, loading time is almost halfed with version 3 and 4 compared to 2. Version 3 is also slightly faster than 4 (*)verion 4 is a "special" version that only instances strings. > If you can count the statistics about marshalled types > (what percent of shared and non shared integers, strings, etc), > it would also be very interesting. That's more tricky, at least on a type=by-type basis, but I could do a global object count. Later. > There is at least one reason. This increases size of the refs table. I checked this, by printing out the size of the instance list when loads() was done: 457 1571 297 1163 429 1539 The columns are test_marshal.py and decimal.py the lines are version 3, version 4( only strings ) and special version5 which is like 3 but omits ints. As you see, the ints correspond to roughly 6% and 2% of the instances respectively. The bulk of the list is taken up by strings (65% and 74%) This shows that adding instancing of all other types on top of the strings does not typically expand the instance list more than 50% ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue16475> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
