← 返回首页
gh-74690: typing: Don't unnecessarily call `_get_protocol_attrs` twice in `_ProtocolMeta.__instancecheck__` by AlexWaygood · Pull Request #103141 · python/cpython · GitHub
Skip to content

Navigation Menu

Toggle navigation
Sign in
Appearance settings
Search or jump to...

Search code, repositories, users, issues, pull requests...

Provide feedback

We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.

Include my email address so I can be contacted

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Appearance settings
Resetting focus

gh-74690: typing: Don't unnecessarily call _get_protocol_attrs twice in _ProtocolMeta.__instancecheck__#103141

Merged
AlexWaygood merged 4 commits into
python:mainfrom
AlexWaygood:protocol-attrs-collection
Mar 31, 2023
Merged

gh-74690: typing: Don't unnecessarily call _get_protocol_attrs twice in _ProtocolMeta.__instancecheck__#103141
AlexWaygood merged 4 commits into
python:mainfrom
AlexWaygood:protocol-attrs-collection

Conversation

AlexWaygood commented Mar 30, 2023
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

This simple optimisation achieves speedups for all kinds of isinstance() checks against runtime-checkable protocols. For structural subtypes that set attributes in __init__ methods, the speedup is dramatic.

Benchmark script
import time from typing import Protocol, runtime_checkable @runtime_checkable class HasX(Protocol): x: int class Foo: @property def x(self) -> int: return 42 class Bar: x = 42 class Baz: def __init__(self): self.x = 42 class Egg: ... class Nominal(HasX): def __init__(self): self.x = 42 class Registered: ... HasX.register(Registered) num_instances = 500_000 foos = [Foo() for _ in range(num_instances)] bars = [Bar() for _ in range(num_instances)] bazzes = [Baz() for _ in range(num_instances)] basket = [Egg() for _ in range(num_instances)] nominals = [Nominal() for _ in range(num_instances)] registereds = [Registered() for _ in range(num_instances)] def bench(objs, title): start_time = time.perf_counter() for obj in objs: isinstance(obj, HasX) elapsed = time.perf_counter() - start_time print(f"{title}: {elapsed:.2f}") bench(foos, "Time taken for objects with a property") bench(bars, "Time taken for objects with a classvar") bench(bazzes, "Time taken for objects with an instance var") bench(basket, "Time taken for objects with no var") bench(nominals, "Time taken for nominal subclass instances") bench(registereds, "Time taken for registered subclass instances")

Results on 01a49d1 (non-debug build, PGO-optimised):

Time taken for objects with a property: 3.63 Time taken for objects with a classvar: 3.82 Time taken for objects with an instance var: 12.22 Time taken for objects with no var: 13.73 Time taken for nominal subclass instances: 12.46 Time taken for registered subclass instances: 20.62

Results with this PR:

Time taken for objects with a property: 2.10 Time taken for objects with a classvar: 2.07 Time taken for objects with an instance var: 2.06 Time taken for objects with no var: 6.94 Time taken for nominal subclass instances: 7.54 Time taken for registered subclass instances: 16.06

(We may want to wait until #103034 is merged and then re-measure.)

Cc. @leycec and @posita, as people who I know care a lot about Protocol performance :)

…` twice in `_ProtocolMeta.__instancecheck__`
Comment thread Lib/typing.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Comment thread Lib/typing.py
return True
if cls._is_protocol:

protocol_attrs = _get_protocol_attrs(cls)

AlexWaygood Mar 31, 2023
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Choose a reason Spam Abuse Off Topic Outdated Duplicate Resolved Low Quality Hide comment

We could possibly cache the result of this call on the protocol class in a __protocol_attrs__ class attribute. But I think I'd rather look at that in a separate PR so that we can evaluate the impact of it in isolation. I'd also want to check to see if there were any behaviour changes, and compare different methods of caching the result of _get_protocol_attrs.

posita Mar 31, 2023
edited
Loading

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.

Choose a reason Spam Abuse Off Topic Outdated Duplicate Resolved Low Quality Hide comment

We could possibly cache the result of this call on the protocol class in a __protocol_attrs__ class attribute. ...

If you decide to tackle this, @beartype provides a caching mechanism for __instancecheck__ results that may be worth a look, if only for inspiration. I believe some of the same caveats would apply. (Full disclosure: I am an author. Happy to chat, if helpful.)

AlexWaygood Mar 31, 2023
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Choose a reason Spam Abuse Off Topic Outdated Duplicate Resolved Low Quality Hide comment

I share @ilevkivskyi's reservations in #74690 (comment) about caching the whole call to __instancecheck__ in the way that I believe beartype does it, but I think caching the call to _get_protocol_attrs could get us a large speedup without the same risk of changing the behaviour. (Apologies if I was unclear in my comment above!) Anyway, TBD in a future PR :)

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Choose a reason Spam Abuse Off Topic Outdated Duplicate Resolved Low Quality Hide comment

Is monkey-patching of the protocol class itself something we need to care about here?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Choose a reason Spam Abuse Off Topic Outdated Duplicate Resolved Low Quality Hide comment

Is monkey-patching of the protocol class itself something we need to care about here?

Pretty unlikely imo. But yeah, it's that kind of thing that I'd want to think through, which is why I'd probably like to leave that to another PR :)

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Some local experimentation (by combining the two branches) indicates that this PR doesn't quite make up for the performance hit from #103034, but does significantly mitigate it.

carljm left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Choose a reason Spam Abuse Off Topic Outdated Duplicate Resolved Low Quality Hide comment

This change LGTM. Nice find!

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

I discussed with @carljm offline, and we decided it's probably better to skip news for this one. On its own it's a performance improvement, but it'll likely be accompanied by #103034(which hurts performance of runtime-checkable protocols), and possibly one or two other optimisations to this code that I'm eyeing up. So the overall impact on performance for runtime-checkable protocols is pretty uncertain at the moment, which would mean including a news entry at this stage would probably just cause confusion to readers of the changelog.

AlexWaygood merged commit 9048d73 into python:main Mar 31, 2023
AlexWaygood deleted the protocol-attrs-collection branch March 31, 2023 17:37

hauntsaninja commented Mar 31, 2023
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Nice find! For what it's worth, I've found users often depend on undocumented aspects of typing.py, so I'd have still included a vague news entry on the lines of "Changed the performance characteristics of _ProtocolMeta.__instancecheck__ by avoiding a redundant call to _get_protocol_attrs" (i.e. make clear something changed but not promise any improvement)

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

I've found users often depend on undocumented aspects of typing.py

Speaking from experience? ;)

This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters. Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

3.12 only security fixes performance Performance or resource usage skip news topic-typing type-feature A feature request or enhancement

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants

Footer

© 2026 GitHub, Inc.