Skip to content

perf: skip hash property - #1115

Merged
notatallshaw merged 2 commits into
pypa:mainfrom
notatallshaw:version/skip-hash-property
Mar 11, 2026
Merged

notatallshaw merged 2 commits into
pypa:mainfrom
notatallshaw:version/skip-hash-property

Conversation

@notatallshaw

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Like all the other methods on Version, it provides a small performance improvement to skip accessing the property. In this case we don't have an other to check the instance on.

Access _key_cache directly and inline _cmpkey call in __hash__ instead of
going through the _key property. This avoids property descriptor overhead
on every hash call, matching the pattern already used by the comparison
method overrides.
@notatallshaw

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

It's fairly mild performance improvement but it's there:


|          | 4.45±0.05ms          | 4.32±0.02ms         |    0.97 | version.TimeVersionSuite.time_hash [runnervm0kj6c/virtualenv-py3.10-PYTHONHASHSEED0]                   |
|          | 2.94±0.01ms          | 2.85±0.01ms         |    0.97 | version.TimeVersionSuite.time_hash [runnervm0kj6c/virtualenv-py3.11-PYTHONHASHSEED0]                   |
|          | 3.56±0.03ms          | 3.51±0.03ms         |    0.98 | version.TimeVersionSuite.time_hash [runnervm0kj6c/virtualenv-py3.12-PYTHONHASHSEED0]                   |
|          | 3.33±0.01ms          | 3.33±0.03ms         |    1    | version.TimeVersionSuite.time_hash [runnervm0kj6c/virtualenv-py3.13-PYTHONHASHSEED0]                   |
|          | 3.22±0.04ms          | 3.18±0.03ms         |    0.99 | version.TimeVersionSuite.time_hash [runnervm0kj6c/virtualenv-py3.14-PYTHONHASHSEED0]                   |
|          | 4.72±0.02ms          | 4.64±0.01ms         |    0.98 | version.TimeVersionSuite.time_hash [runnervm0kj6c/virtualenv-py3.8-PYTHONHASHSEED0]                    |
|          | 4.54±0.03ms          | 4.49±0.02ms         |    0.99 | version.TimeVersionSuite.time_hash [runnervm0kj6c/virtualenv-py3.9-PYTHONHASHSEED0]                    |
|          | 1.13±0.01ms          | 1.04±0.01ms         |    0.93 | version.TimeVersionSuite.time_hash_warm [runnervm0kj6c/virtualenv-py3.10-PYTHONHASHSEED0]              |
|          | 735±6μs              | 672±3μs             |    0.91 | version.TimeVersionSuite.time_hash_warm [runnervm0kj6c/virtualenv-py3.11-PYTHONHASHSEED0]              |
|          | 885±8μs              | 857±6μs             |    0.97 | version.TimeVersionSuite.time_hash_warm [runnervm0kj6c/virtualenv-py3.12-PYTHONHASHSEED0]              |
|          | 886±3μs              | 866±6μs             |    0.98 | version.TimeVersionSuite.time_hash_warm [runnervm0kj6c/virtualenv-py3.13-PYTHONHASHSEED0]              |
| -        | 207±7μs              | 181±6μs             |    0.87 | version.TimeVersionSuite.time_hash_warm [runnervm0kj6c/virtualenv-py3.14-PYTHONHASHSEED0]              |
|          | 1.16±0ms             | 1.08±0ms            |    0.93 | version.TimeVersionSuite.time_hash_warm [runnervm0kj6c/virtualenv-py3.8-PYTHONHASHSEED0]               |
|          | 1.08±0.01ms          | 1000±6μs            |    0.93 | version.TimeVersionSuite.time_hash_warm [runnervm0kj6c/virtualenv-py3.9-PYTHONHASHSEED0]               |

@henryiii henryiii left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Clearly measurable. I wonder if it's true that 3.14 is the fastest - maybe it's optimizing code better and this is more optimizable.

@notatallshaw

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Clearly measurable. I wonder if it's true that 3.14 is the fastest - maybe it's optimizing code better and this is more optimizable.

I don't see Python 3.14 as an outlier running the benchmark a few times locally ¯\(ツ)/¯

@notatallshaw
notatallshaw force-pushed the version/skip-hash-property branch from f3d84d4 to ceff51b Compare March 11, 2026 15:38
@notatallshaw
notatallshaw merged commit baa9ea8 into pypa:main Mar 11, 2026
110 checks passed
@henryiii

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Okay, probably just had a good or bad CI run then.

ngoldbaum pushed a commit to ngoldbaum/packaging that referenced this pull request Apr 1, 2026
This was referenced Apr 13, 2026
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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants