How to make Python run as fast (or faster) than Julia

[Etienne Robillard]

So, how exactly can PyPy and JIT runs multithreaded Python applications 
any faster than Julia on distributed systems?

Right now I think PyPy and JIT can run Python code on my old ia32 
computer faster than with Python/Cython.

How do Julia scale on x86 machines ?

Etienne


Le 2018-02-22 à 11:00, Steven D'Aprano a écrit :
> On Thu, 22 Feb 2018 12:03:09 +0000, bartc wrote:
>
>> The idea of the Fibonacci benchmark is to test how effectively an
>> implementation manages large numbers of recursive function calls. Then,
>> fib(36) would normally involve 48,315,633 calls.
>>
>> This version does only 37, giving a misleading impression.
> Who cares if it only does 37? There is *absolutely no benefit* to those
> additional 48,315,596 calls, and thanks to the benchmark I discovered
> that.[1]
>
> I want to know what is the fastest implementation of Fibonacci I can
> write. I'm not married to the idea that I have to make a ludicrous 48
> million function calls just to get the 36th Fibonacci number.
>
>
>> (It then goes on to suggest using 'numba', and using its JIT compiler,
>> and using on that on an /iterative/ version of fib(). Way to miss the
>> point.
> Indeed, you certainly have.
>
>
>> It might be a technique to bear in mind, but it is nonsensical to say
>> this gives a 17,000 times speed-up over the original code.
> That's *exactly what it did*.
>
> How many years, decades, have you been programming? Have you not realised
> yet that the best way to optimize code is to pick the fastest algorithm
> you can that will do the job? There's no law that says because you
> started with a slow, inefficient algorithm you have to stay with it.
>
>
>> Here's another speed-up I found myself, although it was only 50 times
>> faster, not 17,000: just write the code in C, and call it via
>> os.system("fib.exe").
> Did you include the time taken to capture the text output from stdout,
> parse it, and convert to an int?
>
> Did your C code support numbers greater than 2**64? My fibonacci function
> can calculate the 10,000th Fibonacci number in a blink of the eye:
>
> py> fibi(10000)
> 336447648764317832666216120051075...976171121233066073310059947366875
>
> Output truncated for brevity, it is a 2090-digit number.
>
> Admittedly it did take about a minute and a half to generate all 208988
> digits of the one millionth Fibonacci number, but the performance is fast
> enough for my needs.
>
>
>
>
> [1] Actually I already knew it, but then I didn't perform these
> benchmarks, I'm just linking to them.
>
>

-- 
Etienne Robillard
tkadm30 at yandex.com
https://www.isotopesoftware.ca/