J wrote:
> I am looking to improve the performance of the following piece of Python
> code:-
>
> for cc in StatusContainer:
> for srv in StatusContainer[cc]:
> for id in StatusContainer[cc][srv]['RECV']:
> if id in StageContainer['13']:
> StatusContainer[cc][srv].setdefault('ACK', []).append(id)
> elif id in StageContainer['14']:
> StatusContainer[cc][srv].setdefault('NACK', []).append(id)
> else:
> if id in StageContainer['504'] or id in StageContainer['505']:
> StatusContainer[cc][srv].setdefault('RETRY',
> []).append(id)
>
> Someone in a different forum suggested that I use 'binary search' to
> iterate through the dictionaries but like I mentioned before, I am still
> very new to programming and 'binary search' sounds a bit to complicated to
> me. I was wondering if someone here can have a look at my code above and
> maybe re-write it using 'binary search' or any other way you may see fit
> and re-post the code here with some comments on what each section is
> doing?
Python's hash-based dictionaries are usually very fast; I doubt that binary
search will
help. I'd try replacing the inner loop with set arithmetic:
# untested
stage_ack = set(StageContainer["13"])
stage_nack = set(StageContainer["14"])
stage_retry = set(StageContainer["504"]) | set(StageContainer["505"])
for servers in StatusContainer.itervalues():
for server in servers.itervalues():
recv = set(server["RECV"])
ack = recv & stage_ack
nack = recv & stage_nack
retry = recv & stage_retry
if ack:
server.setdefault("ACK", []).extend(ack)
if nack:
server.setdefault("NACK", []).extend(nack)
if retry:
server.setdefault("RETRY", []).extend(retry)
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
