On Sun, 10 Aug 2014 13:57:36 +1000, Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 10 August 2014 13:20, Antoine Pitrou <anto...@python.org> wrote: > > Le 09/08/2014 12:43, Ben Hoyt a écrit : > > > >> Just thought I'd share some of my excitement about how fast the all-C > >> version [1] of os.scandir() is turning out to be. > >> > >> Below are the results of my scandir / walk benchmark run with three > >> different versions. I'm using an SSD, which seems to make it > >> especially faster than listdir / walk. Note that benchmark results can > >> vary a lot, depending on operating system, file system, hard drive > >> type, and the OS's caching state. > >> > >> Anyway, os.walk() can be FIFTY times as fast using os.scandir(). > > > > > > Very nice results, thank you :-) > > Indeed! > > This may actually motivate me to start working on a redesign of > walkdir at some point, with scandir and DirEntry objects as the basis. > My original approach was just too slow to be useful in practice (at > least when working with trees on the scale of a full Fedora or RHEL > build hosted on an NFS share).
There is another potentially good place in the stdlib to apply scandir: iglob. See issue 22167. --David
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
