Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

It's really awesome that it's not just a speed boost but a drastic decrease in memory usage too.

Going from a 230mb Flask app down to 55mb is huge if it's really a drop in replacement. If you factor in gunicorn process count, the wins are even higher because if you had 4 gunicorn processes each using 230mb but now they use 55mb, you're really going from 920mb down to 220mb of RAM.

Edit: This isn't true in the end, a brain malfunction mis-read the table thinking PyPy was actually the regular Python interpreter. It would be interesting to see how it compares to the default Python implementation for memory usage tho.




From the benchmark numbers reported in the post, pyston uses slightly more memory than cpython for the flaskblogging benchmark. switching to pyston only a win in terms of reducing memory consumption if you're using pypy, and it would be more of a win to switch to cpython


Wow thanks for the clarification.

I don't know why but I read PyPy 7.3.2 as Python 3.7 in the table. Talk about a brain auto-complete failure haha.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: