MRAB wrote:
dq wrote:
MRAB wrote:
dq wrote:
dq wrote:
MRAB wrote:
dq wrote:
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
So does anyone know what the deal is with this? Why is the
same code so much slower on Windows? Hope someone can tell me
before a holy war erupts :-)
Only the holy war can give an answer
On 2009-02-06, Martin v. L?wis wrote:
> To investigate further, you might drop the write operating,
> and measure only source.read(). If that is slower, then, for
> some reason, the network speed is bad on Windows. Maybe you
> have the network interfaces misconfigured? Maybe you are using
> wirel
dq wrote:
MRAB wrote:
dq wrote:
dq wrote:
MRAB wrote:
dq wrote:
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
So does anyone know what the deal is with this? Why is the same
code so much slower on Windows? Hope someone can tell me before
a holy war erupts :-)
Only the holy war can give an answer here. It cer
MRAB wrote:
dq wrote:
dq wrote:
MRAB wrote:
dq wrote:
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
So does anyone know what the deal is with this? Why is
the same code so much slower on Windows? Hope someone
can tell me before a holy war erupts :-)
Only the holy war can give an answer here. It certainly has
dq wrote:
> dq wrote:
>> MRAB wrote:
>>> dq wrote:
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
>> So does anyone know what the deal is with this? Why is the
>> same code so much slower on Windows? Hope someone can tell
>> me before a holy war erupts :-)
>
> Only the holy war can give an answ
MRAB wrote:
dq wrote:
MRAB wrote:
dq wrote:
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
So does anyone know what the deal is with this? Why is the
same code so much slower on Windows? Hope someone can tell
me before a holy war erupts :-)
Only the holy war can give an answer here. It certainly has
*nothing* t
dq wrote:
MRAB wrote:
dq wrote:
> Martin v. Löwis wrote:
>>> So does anyone know what the deal is with this? Why is the same
code so
>>> much slower on Windows? Hope someone can tell me before a holy war
>>> erupts :-)
>>
>> Only the holy war can give an answer here. It certainly has
dq wrote:
MRAB wrote:
dq wrote:
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
So does anyone know what the deal is with this? Why is the
same code so much slower on Windows? Hope someone can tell
me before a holy war erupts :-)
Only the holy war can give an answer here. It certainly has
*nothing* to do with Pyt
MRAB wrote:
dq wrote:
> Martin v. Löwis wrote:
>>> So does anyone know what the deal is with this? Why is the same
code so
>>> much slower on Windows? Hope someone can tell me before a holy war
>>> erupts :-)
>>
>> Only the holy war can give an answer here. It certainly has
*nothing* t
dq wrote:
> Martin v. Löwis wrote:
>>> So does anyone know what the deal is with this? Why is the same
code so
>>> much slower on Windows? Hope someone can tell me before a holy war
>>> erupts :-)
>>
>> Only the holy war can give an answer here. It certainly has *nothing* to
>> do with Python;
Martin v. Löwis wrote:
So does anyone know what the deal is with this? Why is the same code so
much slower on Windows? Hope someone can tell me before a holy war
erupts :-)
Only the holy war can give an answer here. It certainly has *nothing* to
do with Python; Python calls the operating syst
dq wrote:
> This runs great on Ubuntu. I get DL speeds of about 1.5 Mb/s on the
> SATA HD or on a usb-connected iPod, but if I run the same program on
> Windows (with a 2 GHz core 2 duo, 7200 rpm sata drive---better hardware
> specs than the Ubuntu box), it maxes out at about 500 kb/s. Worse
> So does anyone know what the deal is with this? Why is the same code so
> much slower on Windows? Hope someone can tell me before a holy war
> erupts :-)
Only the holy war can give an answer here. It certainly has *nothing* to
do with Python; Python calls the operating system functions to read
I've googled this pretty extensively and can't find anyone who's had the
same problem, so here it is:
I wrote a console program in python to download podcasts, so speed is an
issue. I have 1.6 M down. The key bit of downloading code is this:
source = urllib2.urlopen( url )
target = open( fi
14 matches
Mail list logo
