Re: String concatenation - which is the fastest way ?

Path	csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!aioe.org!feeder.news-service.com!news2.euro.net!newsgate.cistron.nl!newsgate.news.xs4all.nl!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail
Return-Path	<rosuav@gmail.com>
X-Original-To	python-list@python.org
Delivered-To	python-list@mail.python.org
X-Spam-Status	OK 0.078
X-Spam-Evidence	'H': 0.84; 'S': 0.00; 'ram': 0.05; ':-)': 0.06; 'app,': 0.07; '32-bit': 0.09; 'from:addr:rosuav': 0.16; 'from:name:chris angelico': 0.16; 'profiling,': 0.16; 'using,': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.16; 'admin': 0.18; 'memory': 0.21; "doesn't": 0.22; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.22; 'obviously': 0.23; '+0100,': 0.23; 'pm,': 0.24; 'aug': 0.24; 'string': 0.26; 'beyond': 0.28; 'thu,': 0.28; 'server': 0.29; 'oracle': 0.29; 'looks': 0.29; 'message-id:@mail.gmail.com': 0.29; '4gb': 0.30; 'chris': 0.32; 'app': 0.33; 'actually': 0.33; 'there': 0.33; 'to:addr:python- list': 0.33; 'subject: ?': 0.34; 'doing': 0.36; 'some': 0.38; 'received:google.com': 0.38; 'received:209.85': 0.38; 'subject:: ': 0.39; "there's": 0.39; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.39; 'where': 0.40; 'more': 0.60; 'huge': 0.61; 'your': 0.61; 'course.': 0.63; 'here': 0.65; 'due': 0.66; 'taking': 0.66; 'guarantee': 0.66; 'limit': 0.66; '11,': 0.68; 'glad': 0.70; 'serious': 0.78; '12:52': 0.84; 'contention': 0.84; 'cpu.': 0.84; 'then!': 0.84
DKIM-Signature	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=1fZWSanxCMmzLP1mgJNjWJ3z2q41gSQRE+xncC4JOKc=; b=SH59RqwdVE2bVqeStoVUbf4bDdNVDuO/sm4dedXN7vMWDE4xjwC0n7gF87kL1uaMEv Jv64FjMGkAVhOCy5kytdFp5iR65UuTrc6zM6vvZAqzsDP3HG5n6uNxiymdpmPvGb33z3 TSGbQadfy06BcTkAvBRqAfjZYZrA9OzcT0Cu0=
MIME-Version	1.0
In-Reply-To	<20110811115255.GC4990@host.pgf.com.pl>
References	<20110810111754.GD5045@host.pgf.com.pl> <CAPTjJmrF0GcVs0onfoCHAbMe38b5iLXgFX1R7G_RXcKxjPH5wQ@mail.gmail.com> <20110810133146.GE5045@host.pgf.com.pl> <j1ub3q$65c$1@dough.gmane.org> <20110811064030.GB4990@host.pgf.com.pl> <CAPTjJmqiiKcT7Zg-XkbrQ4r-keU9+1Kj=+sEwa4xp==2EG-5aQ@mail.gmail.com> <20110811115255.GC4990@host.pgf.com.pl>
Date	Thu, 11 Aug 2011 12:58:36 +0100
Subject	Re: String concatenation - which is the fastest way ?
From	Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com>
To	python-list@python.org
Content-Type	text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-BeenThere	python-list@python.org
X-Mailman-Version	2.1.12
Precedence	list
List-Id	General discussion list for the Python programming language <python-list.python.org>
List-Unsubscribe	<http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-list>, <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive	<http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list>
List-Post	<mailto:python-list@python.org>
List-Help	<mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe	<http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list>, <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=subscribe>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.python
Message-ID	<mailman.2173.1313063918.1164.python-list@python.org> (permalink)
Lines	22
NNTP-Posting-Host	2001:888:2000:d::a6
X-Trace	1313063918 news.xs4all.nl 23978 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:58822
X-Complaints-To	abuse@xs4all.nl
Xref	x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.python:11207

Show key headers only | View raw

On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 12:52 PM,  <przemolicc@poczta.fm> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 11:59:31AM +0100, Chris Angelico wrote:
>> There's no guarantee that all of that 256GB is available to you, of course.
>
> I am the admin of this server - the memory is available for us :-)

Hehe. I mean to any particular application; obviously you're way WAY
beyond the 4GB limit of a 32-bit app, though there may be other
limits; the main consideration here is contention - whatever Oracle
itself is using, your concatenation app can't.

>> You'll need to do some serious profiling, though, to ascertain where
>> the bottleneck really is. Is it actually slow doing the concatenation,
>> or is it taking more time reading/writing the disk? Is it actually all
>> just taking time due to RAM usage? Proper string concatenation doesn't
>> need a huge amount of CPU.
>
> I did my homework :-) - the CPU working on concatenation is a bottleneck.

Glad you have! So many people don't. Looks like you have a plan there, then!

ChrisA

Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: String concatenation - which is the fastest way ? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2011-08-11 12:58 +0100

csiph-web