[issue11271] concurrent.futures.ProcessPoolExecutor.map() slower than multiprocessing.Pool.map() for fast function argument

[Tobias Brink]

Tobias Brink <tobias.brink at gmail.com> added the comment:

I can confirm an overhead of 2 ms to 3 ms using a relatively recent Intel Core i5 CPU.

I (personally) believe these 3 ms to be a pretty big overhead on modern computers and I also believe that it would be relatively simple to reduce it.

I don't have much time at the moment but I will try to produce a complete proof of concept patch for the futures module in the next weeks. I'd be happy to get some comments when it is finished.

----------

_______________________________________
Python tracker <report at bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue11271>
_______________________________________