Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

New copy method is far slower than old copy method #393

Open
jakebeal opened this issue Feb 25, 2022 · 0 comments
Open

New copy method is far slower than old copy method #393

jakebeal opened this issue Feb 25, 2022 · 0 comments

Comments

@jakebeal
Copy link
Contributor

I've started converting SBOL-utilities entires over to the new copy method.
In doing so, however, I have found that it is dramatically slower than the old.

A good example of this, when running the test_expansion test in test_expand_combinatorial_derivations@27a281d the copy command at line 36 took 10.2 seconds to run. Previously, it took only 0.28 seconds to run.

Profiling suggests that nearly all of the time is being spent in deepcopy, which was not used in the prior copy method:

ncalls  tottime  percall  cumtime  percall filename:lineno(function)
28258411/286   28.926    0.000   71.302    0.249 copy.py:128(deepcopy)
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant