真正的文件对象比 StringIO 和 cStringIO 慢?

Real file objects slower than StringIO and cStringIO?

StringIO在其代码中有如下注释:

Notes:
- Using a real file is often faster (but less convenient).
- There's also a much faster implementation in C, called cStringIO, but
  it's not subclassable.

"real file is often faster" 行对我来说似乎很奇怪:写入磁盘怎么会比写入内存好呢?我尝试分析这些不同的情况并得到与这些文档相矛盾的结果,this question. This other question 的答案确实解释了为什么 cStringIO 在某些情况下速度较慢,尽管我在这里没有进行任何连接。该测试将给定数量的数据写入文件,然后查找到开头并将其读回。在 "new" 测试中,我每次都创建一个新对象,而在 "same" 测试中,我为每次重复截断并重复使用相同的对象,以排除开销来源。该开销对于使用数据量较小而非数据量较大的临时文件很重要。

代码是 here.

Using 1000 passes with size 1.0KiB
New StringIO:   0.0026 0.0025 0.0034
Same StringIO:  0.0026 0.0023 0.0030
New cStringIO:  0.0009 0.0010 0.0008
Same cStringIO: 0.0009 0.0009 0.0009
New tempfile:   0.0679 0.0554 0.0542
Same tempfile:  0.0069 0.0064 0.0070
==============================================================
Using 1000 passes with size 100.0KiB
New StringIO:   0.0093 0.0099 0.0108
Same StringIO:  0.0109 0.0090 0.0086
New cStringIO:  0.0130 0.0139 0.0120
Same cStringIO: 0.0118 0.0115 0.0124
New tempfile:   0.1006 0.0905 0.0899
Same tempfile:  0.0573 0.0526 0.0523
==============================================================
Using 1000 passes with size 1.0MiB
New StringIO:   0.0727 0.0700 0.0717
Same StringIO:  0.0740 0.0735 0.0712
New cStringIO:  0.1484 0.1399 0.1470
Same cStringIO: 0.1493 0.1393 0.1465
New tempfile:   0.6576 0.6750 0.6821
Same tempfile:  0.5951 0.5870 0.5678
==============================================================
Using 1000 passes with size 10.0MiB
New StringIO:   1.0965 1.1129 1.1079
Same StringIO:  1.1206 1.2979 1.1932
New cStringIO:  2.2532 2.2162 2.2482
Same cStringIO: 2.2624 2.2225 2.2377
New tempfile:   6.8350 6.7924 6.8481
Same tempfile:  6.8424 7.8114 7.8404
==============================================================

这两个 StringIO 实现非常相似,尽管 cStringIO 对于大数据量会显着减慢。但是 tempfile.TemporaryFile 总是比最慢的 StringIO 花费 3 倍的时间。

这完全取决于 "often" 的含义。 StringIO 是通过将您的写入保存在列表中然后在读取时将列表加入字符串来实现的。您的测试用例 - 一系列写入,然后是读取 - 是它的最佳方案。如果我调整测试用例以在文件中执行 50 个随机 writes/reads,那么 cStringIO 往往会在文件系统中获胜。

该评论似乎反映了系统程序员的偏见,让 c 库和操作系统来处理文件系统的事情,因为很难从一般意义上猜测在所有条件下什么表现最好。

def write_and_read_test_data(flo):
    fsize = len(closure['test_data'])
    flo.write(closure['test_data'])
    for _ in range(50):
        flo.seek(random.randint(0, fsize-1))
        flo.write('x')
        flo.read(1)
    flo.seek(0)
    closure['output'] = flo.read()

10meg 测试用例比我的注意力持续时间还长...

Using 1000 passes with size 1.0KiB
New StringIO:   0.9551 0.9467 0.9366
Same StringIO:  0.9252 0.9228 0.9207
New cStringIO:  0.3274 0.3280 0.3251
Same cStringIO: 0.3182 0.3231 0.3280
New tempfile:   1.1833 1.1853 1.1650
Same tempfile:  0.9563 0.9414 0.9504
==============================================================
Using 1000 passes with size 100.0KiB
New StringIO:   5.6253 5.6589 5.6025
Same StringIO:  5.5799 5.5608 5.5589
New cStringIO:  0.4157 0.4133 0.4140
Same cStringIO: 0.4078 0.4076 0.4088
New tempfile:   2.0420 2.0391 2.0408
Same tempfile:  1.5722 1.5749 1.5693
==============================================================
Using 1000 passes with size 1.0MiB
New StringIO:   105.2350 106.3904 107.5411
Same StringIO:  108.3744 109.4510 105.6012
New cStringIO:  2.4698 2.4781 2.4165
Same cStringIO: 2.4699 2.4600 2.4451
New tempfile:   6.6086 6.5783 6.5916
Same tempfile:  6.1420 6.1614 6.1366