Message129893
| Author |
vstinner |
| Recipients |
Aaron.Sherman, giampaolo.rodola, gregory.p.smith, neologix, pitrou, vstinner |
| Date |
2011年03月02日.13:43:18 |
| SpamBayes Score |
4.456265e-06 |
| Marked as misclassified |
No |
| Message-id |
<1299073399.49.0.850114657378.issue11314@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content |
Benchmark on subprocess with a less trivial example. Run 100x python -c pass: 8.63 sec without my patch, 8.53 sec with my patch => only 1% faster, so the patch is just useless on a real world example.
Finally, I think that there is just nothing to do on Python 2: the overhead between fork(), os.popen and subprocess doesn't impact real world programs. On Python 3: the most critical issue is that close_fds=True is much slower than close_fds=False, but there is already an issue for that (#11284).
So let's close this issue. You can still comment it if you disagree. But if you would like to reopen it: please come with numbers of a benchmark on real programs (not on "exit 0" with a shell or /bin/false). |
|