Fix wording and spelling
This commit is contained in:
parent
4d9406ca17
commit
114408971f
175
pep-0564.rst
175
pep-0564.rst
|
@ -13,15 +13,15 @@ Python-Version: 3.7
|
||||||
Abstract
|
Abstract
|
||||||
========
|
========
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Add six new "nanosecond" variant of existing functions to the ``time``
|
Add six new "nanosecond" variants of existing functions to the ``time``
|
||||||
module: ``clock_gettime_ns()``, ``clock_settime_ns()``,
|
module: ``clock_gettime_ns()``, ``clock_settime_ns()``,
|
||||||
``monotonic_ns()``, ``perf_counter_ns()``, ``process_time_ns()`` and
|
``monotonic_ns()``, ``perf_counter_ns()``, ``process_time_ns()`` and
|
||||||
``time_ns()``. Similar to the existing functions without the ``_ns``
|
``time_ns()``. While similar to the existing functions without the
|
||||||
suffix, they have nanosecond resolution: use a number of nanoseconds as
|
``_ns`` suffix, they provide nanosecond resolution: they return a number of
|
||||||
a Python int.
|
nanoseconds as a Python ``int``.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
The ``time.time_ns()`` resolution measured in Python is 3 times better
|
The ``time.time_ns()`` resolution is 3 times better than the ``time.time()``
|
||||||
than the ``time.time()`` resolution on Linux and Windows.
|
resolution on Linux and Windows.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Rationale
|
Rationale
|
||||||
|
@ -31,15 +31,15 @@ Float type limited to 104 days
|
||||||
------------------------------
|
------------------------------
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
The clocks resolution of desktop and latop computers is getting closer
|
The clocks resolution of desktop and latop computers is getting closer
|
||||||
to nanosecond resolution. More and more clocks have a frequency in MHz,
|
to nanosecond resolution. More and more clocks have a frequency in MHz,
|
||||||
up to GHz for the CPU TSC clock.
|
up to GHz for the CPU TSC clock.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
The Python ``time.time()`` function returns the current time as a
|
The Python ``time.time()`` function returns the current time as a
|
||||||
floatting point number which is usually a 64-bit binary floatting number
|
floating-point number which is usually a 64-bit binary floating-point
|
||||||
(in the IEEE 754 format).
|
number (in the IEEE 754 format).
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
The problem is that the float type starts to lose nanoseconds after 104
|
The problem is that the ``float`` type starts to lose nanoseconds after 104
|
||||||
days. Conversion from nanoseconds (``int``) to seconds (``float``) and
|
days. Converting from nanoseconds (``int``) to seconds (``float``) and
|
||||||
then back to nanoseconds (``int``) to check if conversions lose
|
then back to nanoseconds (``int``) to check if conversions lose
|
||||||
precision::
|
precision::
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
@ -53,7 +53,8 @@ precision::
|
||||||
104 days, 5:59:59.254741
|
104 days, 5:59:59.254741
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
``time.time()`` returns seconds elapsed since the UNIX epoch: January
|
``time.time()`` returns seconds elapsed since the UNIX epoch: January
|
||||||
1st, 1970. This function loses precision since May 1970 (47 years ago)::
|
1st, 1970. This function hasn't had nanosecond precision since May 1970
|
||||||
|
(47 years ago)::
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
>>> import datetime
|
>>> import datetime
|
||||||
>>> unix_epoch = datetime.datetime(1970, 1, 1)
|
>>> unix_epoch = datetime.datetime(1970, 1, 1)
|
||||||
|
@ -75,7 +76,7 @@ The PEP was rejected for different reasons:
|
||||||
Python.
|
Python.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
* It was not clear if hardware clocks really had a resolution of 1
|
* It was not clear if hardware clocks really had a resolution of 1
|
||||||
nanosecond, especially at the Python level.
|
nanosecond, or if that made sense at the Python level.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
* The ``decimal.Decimal`` type is uncommon in Python and so requires
|
* The ``decimal.Decimal`` type is uncommon in Python and so requires
|
||||||
to adapt code to handle it.
|
to adapt code to handle it.
|
||||||
|
@ -84,32 +85,32 @@ The PEP was rejected for different reasons:
|
||||||
Issues caused by precision loss
|
Issues caused by precision loss
|
||||||
-------------------------------
|
-------------------------------
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Example 1: measure time delta in long running process
|
Example 1: measure time delta in long-running process
|
||||||
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
A server is running for longer than 104 days. A clock is read before and
|
A server is running for longer than 104 days. A clock is read before and
|
||||||
after running a function to measure its performance to detect
|
after running a function to measure its performance to detect
|
||||||
performance issues at runtime. Such benchmark only lose precision
|
performance issues at runtime. Such benchmark only loses precision
|
||||||
because of the float type used by clocks, not because of the clock
|
because of the float type used by clocks, not because of the clock
|
||||||
resolution.
|
resolution.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
On Python microbenchmarks, it is common to see function calls taking
|
On Python microbenchmarks, it is common to see function calls taking
|
||||||
less than 100 ns. A difference of a single nanosecond becomes
|
less than 100 ns. A difference of a few nanoseconds might become
|
||||||
significant.
|
significant.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Example 2: compare time with different resolution
|
Example 2: compare times with different resolution
|
||||||
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Two programs "A" and "B" are runing on the same system and use the system
|
Two programs "A" and "B" are running on the same system and use the system
|
||||||
clock. The program A reads the system clock with nanosecond resolution
|
clock. The program A reads the system clock with nanosecond resolution
|
||||||
and writes the timestamp with nanosecond resolution. The program B reads
|
and writes a timestamp with nanosecond resolution. The program B reads
|
||||||
the timestamp with nanosecond resolution, but compares it to the system
|
the timestamp with nanosecond resolution, but compares it to the system
|
||||||
clock read with a worse resolution. To simplify the example, let's say
|
clock read with a worse resolution. To simplify the example, let's say
|
||||||
that it reads the clock with second resolution. If that case, there is a
|
that B reads the clock with second resolution. If that case, there is a
|
||||||
window of 1 second while the program B can see the timestamp written by A
|
window of 1 second while the program B can see the timestamp written by A
|
||||||
as "in the future".
|
as "in the future".
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Nowadays, more and more databases and filesystems support storing time
|
Nowadays, more and more databases and filesystems support storing times
|
||||||
with nanosecond resolution.
|
with nanosecond resolution.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
.. note::
|
.. note::
|
||||||
|
@ -164,15 +165,15 @@ This PEP adds six new functions to the ``time`` module:
|
||||||
* ``time.time_ns()``
|
* ``time.time_ns()``
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
These functions are similar to the version without the ``_ns`` suffix,
|
These functions are similar to the version without the ``_ns`` suffix,
|
||||||
but use nanoseconds as Python ``int``.
|
but return a number of nanoseconds as a Python ``int``.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
For example, ``time.monotonic_ns() == int(time.monotonic() * 1e9)`` if
|
For example, ``time.monotonic_ns() == int(time.monotonic() * 1e9)`` if
|
||||||
``monotonic()`` value is small enough to not lose precision.
|
``monotonic()`` value is small enough to not lose precision.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
These functions are needed because they handle large timestamps, like
|
These functions are needed because they may return "large" timestamps,
|
||||||
time.time() which uses the UNIX epoch as reference, and so their version
|
like ``time.time()`` which uses the UNIX epoch as reference, and so their
|
||||||
without the ``_ns`` suffix are likely to lose precision at the
|
``float``-returning variants are likely to lose precision at the nanosecond
|
||||||
nanosecond resolution.
|
resolution.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Unchanged functions
|
Unchanged functions
|
||||||
-------------------
|
-------------------
|
||||||
|
@ -180,13 +181,13 @@ Unchanged functions
|
||||||
Since the ``time.clock()`` function was deprecated in Python 3.3, no
|
Since the ``time.clock()`` function was deprecated in Python 3.3, no
|
||||||
``time.clock_ns()`` is added.
|
``time.clock_ns()`` is added.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Python has other functions handling time. No nanosecond variant was
|
Python has other time-returning functions. No nanosecond variant is
|
||||||
proposed because their internal resolution is greater or equal to 1 us,
|
proposed for these other functions, either because their internal
|
||||||
or because their maximum value is a small enough to not lose precision.
|
resolution is greater or equal to 1 us, or because their maximum value
|
||||||
For example, the maximum value of ``clock_getres()`` should be 1
|
is small enough to not lose precision. For example, the maximum value of
|
||||||
second.
|
``time.clock_getres()`` should be 1 second.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Example of unchanged functions:
|
Examples of unchanged functions:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
* ``os`` module: ``sched_rr_get_interval()``, ``times()``, ``wait3()``
|
* ``os`` module: ``sched_rr_get_interval()``, ``times()``, ``wait3()``
|
||||||
and ``wait4()``
|
and ``wait4()``
|
||||||
|
@ -200,8 +201,8 @@ Example of unchanged functions:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
See also the `Annex: Clocks Resolution in Python`_.
|
See also the `Annex: Clocks Resolution in Python`_.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
A new nanosecond flavor of these functions may be added later if an
|
A new nanosecond-returning flavor of these functions may be added later
|
||||||
operating system adds a new function providing better resolution.
|
if an operating system exposes new functions providing better resolution.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Alternatives and discussion
|
Alternatives and discussion
|
||||||
|
@ -210,47 +211,48 @@ Alternatives and discussion
|
||||||
Sub-nanosecond resolution
|
Sub-nanosecond resolution
|
||||||
-------------------------
|
-------------------------
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
``time.time_ns()`` API is not "future-proof": if clocks resolutions
|
``time.time_ns()`` API is not theoretically future-proof: if clock
|
||||||
increase, new Python functions may be needed.
|
resolutions continue to increase below the nanosecond level, new Python
|
||||||
|
functions may be needed.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
In practive, the resolution of 1 nanosecond is currently enough for all
|
In practive, the 1 nanosecond resolution is currently enough for all
|
||||||
structures used by all operating systems functions.
|
structures returned by all common operating systems functions.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Hardware clock with a resolution better than 1 nanosecond already
|
Hardware clocks with a resolution better than 1 nanosecond already
|
||||||
exists. For example, the frequency of a CPU TSC clock is the CPU base
|
exist. For example, the frequency of a CPU TSC clock is the CPU base
|
||||||
frequency: the resolution is around 0.3 ns for a CPU running at 3
|
frequency: the resolution is around 0.3 ns for a CPU running at 3
|
||||||
GHz. Users who have access to such hardware and really need
|
GHz. Users who have access to such hardware and really need
|
||||||
sub-nanosecond resolution can easily extend Python for their needs.
|
sub-nanosecond resolution can however extend Python for their needs.
|
||||||
Such rare use case don't justify to design the Python standard library
|
Such a rare use case doesn't justify to design the Python standard library
|
||||||
to support sub-nanosecond resolution.
|
to support sub-nanosecond resolution.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
For the CPython implementation, nanosecond resolution is convenient: the
|
For the CPython implementation, nanosecond resolution is convenient: the
|
||||||
standard and well supported ``int64_t`` type can be used to store time.
|
standard and well supported ``int64_t`` type can be used to store a
|
||||||
It supports a time delta between -292 years and 292 years. Using the
|
nanosecond-precise timestamp. It supports a timespan of -292 years
|
||||||
UNIX epoch as reference, this type supports time since year 1677 to year
|
to +292 years. Using the UNIX epoch as reference, it therefore supports
|
||||||
2262::
|
representing times since year 1677 to year 2262::
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
>>> 1970 - 2 ** 63 / (10 ** 9 * 3600 * 24 * 365.25)
|
>>> 1970 - 2 ** 63 / (10 ** 9 * 3600 * 24 * 365.25)
|
||||||
1677.728976954687
|
1677.728976954687
|
||||||
>>> 1970 + 2 ** 63 / (10 ** 9 * 3600 * 24 * 365.25)
|
>>> 1970 + 2 ** 63 / (10 ** 9 * 3600 * 24 * 365.25)
|
||||||
2262.271023045313
|
2262.271023045313
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Modify time.time() result type
|
Modifying time.time() result type
|
||||||
------------------------------
|
---------------------------------
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
It was proposed to modify ``time.time()`` to return a different float
|
It was proposed to modify ``time.time()`` to return a different number
|
||||||
type with better precision.
|
type with better precision.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
The PEP 410 proposed to use ``decimal.Decimal`` which already exists and
|
The PEP 410 proposed to return ``decimal.Decimal`` which already exists and
|
||||||
supports arbitray precision, but it was rejected. Apart
|
supports arbitray precision, but it was rejected. Apart from
|
||||||
``decimal.Decimal``, no portable ``float`` type with better precision is
|
``decimal.Decimal``, no portable real number type with better precision
|
||||||
currently available in Python.
|
is currently available in Python.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Changing the builtin Python ``float`` type is out of the scope of this
|
Changing the built-in Python ``float`` type is out of the scope of this
|
||||||
PEP.
|
PEP.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Moreover, changing existing functions to return a new type introduces a
|
Moreover, changing existing functions to return a new type introduces a
|
||||||
risk of breaking the backward compatibility even the new type is
|
risk of breaking the backward compatibility even if the new type is
|
||||||
designed carefully.
|
designed carefully.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
@ -259,24 +261,24 @@ Different types
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Many ideas of new types were proposed to support larger or arbitrary
|
Many ideas of new types were proposed to support larger or arbitrary
|
||||||
precision: fractions, structures or 2-tuple using integers,
|
precision: fractions, structures or 2-tuple using integers,
|
||||||
fixed-precision floating point number, etc.
|
fixed-point number, etc.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
See also the PEP 410 for a previous long discussion on other types.
|
See also the PEP 410 for a previous long discussion on other types.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Adding a new type requires more effort to support it, than reusing
|
Adding a new type requires more effort to support it, than reusing
|
||||||
the existing ``int`` type. The standard library, third party code and
|
the existing ``int`` type. The standard library, third party code and
|
||||||
applications would have to be modified to support it.
|
applications would have to be modified to support it.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
The Python ``int`` type is well known, well supported, ease to
|
The Python ``int`` type is well known, well supported, easy to
|
||||||
manipulate, and supports all arithmetic operations like:
|
manipulate, and supports all arithmetic operations such as
|
||||||
``dt = t2 - t1``.
|
``dt = t2 - t1``.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Moreover, using nanoseconds as integer is not new in Python, it's
|
Moreover, taking/returning an integer number of nanoseconds is not a
|
||||||
already used for ``os.stat_result`` and
|
new concept in Python, as witnessed by ``os.stat_result`` and
|
||||||
``os.utime(ns=(atime_ns, mtime_ns))``.
|
``os.utime(ns=(atime_ns, mtime_ns))``.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
.. note::
|
.. note::
|
||||||
If the Python ``float`` type becomes larger (ex: decimal128 or
|
If the Python ``float`` type becomes larger (e.g. decimal128 or
|
||||||
float128), the ``time.time()`` precision will increase as well.
|
float128), the ``time.time()`` precision will increase as well.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Different API
|
Different API
|
||||||
|
@ -291,13 +293,14 @@ resolution. If each Python module uses a different resolution, it can
|
||||||
become difficult to handle different resolutions, instead of just
|
become difficult to handle different resolutions, instead of just
|
||||||
seconds (``time.time()`` returning ``float``) and nanoseconds
|
seconds (``time.time()`` returning ``float``) and nanoseconds
|
||||||
(``time.time_ns()`` returning ``int``). Moreover, as written above,
|
(``time.time_ns()`` returning ``int``). Moreover, as written above,
|
||||||
there is no need for resolution better than 1 nanosecond in practive in
|
there is no need for resolution better than 1 nanosecond in practice in
|
||||||
the Python standard library.
|
the Python standard library.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
New time_ns module
|
A new module
|
||||||
------------------
|
------------
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Add a new ``time_ns`` module which contains the six new functions:
|
It was proposed to add a new ``time_ns`` module containing the following
|
||||||
|
functions:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
* ``time_ns.clock_gettime(clock_id)``
|
* ``time_ns.clock_gettime(clock_id)``
|
||||||
* ``time_ns.clock_settime(clock_id, time: int)``
|
* ``time_ns.clock_settime(clock_id, time: int)``
|
||||||
|
@ -306,25 +309,25 @@ Add a new ``time_ns`` module which contains the six new functions:
|
||||||
* ``time_ns.process_time()``
|
* ``time_ns.process_time()``
|
||||||
* ``time_ns.time()``
|
* ``time_ns.time()``
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
The first question is if the ``time_ns`` should expose exactly the same
|
The first question is whether the ``time_ns`` module should expose exactly
|
||||||
API (constants, functions, etc.) than the ``time`` module. It can be
|
the same API (constants, functions, etc.) as the ``time`` module. It can be
|
||||||
painful to maintain two flavors of the ``time`` module. How users use
|
painful to maintain two flavors of the ``time`` module. How are users use
|
||||||
suppose to make a choice between these two modules?
|
supposed to make a choice between these two modules?
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
If tomorrow, other nanosecond variant are needed in the ``os`` module,
|
If tomorrow, other nanosecond variants are needed in the ``os`` module,
|
||||||
will we have to add a new ``os_ns`` module as well? There are functions
|
will we have to add a new ``os_ns`` module as well? There are functions
|
||||||
related to time in many modules: ``time``, ``os``, ``signal``,
|
related to time in many modules: ``time``, ``os``, ``signal``,
|
||||||
``resource``, ``select``, etc.
|
``resource``, ``select``, etc.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Another idea is to add a ``time.ns`` submodule or a nested-namespace to
|
Another idea is to add a ``time.ns`` submodule or a nested-namespace to
|
||||||
get the ``time.ns.time()`` syntax.
|
get the ``time.ns.time()`` syntax, but it suffers from the same issues.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Annex: Clocks Resolution in Python
|
Annex: Clocks Resolution in Python
|
||||||
==================================
|
==================================
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
This annex contains the resolution of clocks measured in Python, and not
|
This annex contains the resolution of clocks as measured in Python, and
|
||||||
the resolution announced by the operating system or the resolution of
|
not the resolution announced by the operating system or the resolution of
|
||||||
the internal structure used by the operating system.
|
the internal structure used by the operating system.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Script
|
Script
|
||||||
|
@ -413,16 +416,16 @@ Analysis
|
||||||
The resolution of ``time.time_ns()`` is much better than
|
The resolution of ``time.time_ns()`` is much better than
|
||||||
``time.time()``: **84 ns (2.8x better) vs 239 ns on Linux and 318 us
|
``time.time()``: **84 ns (2.8x better) vs 239 ns on Linux and 318 us
|
||||||
(2.8x better) vs 894 us on Windows**. The ``time.time()`` resolution will
|
(2.8x better) vs 894 us on Windows**. The ``time.time()`` resolution will
|
||||||
becomes larger (worse) next years since every day adds
|
only become larger (worse) as years pass since every day adds
|
||||||
864,00,000,000,000 nanoseconds to the system clock which increases the
|
86,400,000,000,000 nanoseconds to the system clock, which increases the
|
||||||
precision loss.
|
precision loss.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
The difference between ``time.perf_counter()``, ``time.monotonic
|
The difference between ``time.perf_counter()``, ``time.monotonic()``,
|
||||||
clock()``, ``time.process_time()`` and their nanosecond variant is
|
``time.process_time()`` and their respective nanosecond variants is
|
||||||
not visible in this quick script since the script runs less than 1
|
not visible in this quick script since the script runs for less than 1
|
||||||
minute, and the uptime of the computer used to run the script was
|
minute, and the uptime of the computer used to run the script was
|
||||||
smaller than 1 week. A significant difference should be seen with an
|
smaller than 1 week. A significant difference may be seen if uptime
|
||||||
uptime of at least 104 days.
|
reaches 104 days or more.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
``resource.getrusage()`` and ``times()`` have a resolution greater or
|
``resource.getrusage()`` and ``times()`` have a resolution greater or
|
||||||
equal to 1 microsecond, and so don't need a variant with nanosecond
|
equal to 1 microsecond, and so don't need a variant with nanosecond
|
||||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue