⚡️ Speed up function task
by -99%
#113
Open
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
📄 -99% (-0.99x) speedup for
task
insrc/async_examples/concurrency.py
⏱️ Runtime :
16.8 milliseconds
→1.80 seconds
(best of297
runs)📝 Explanation and details
This optimization actually makes the code significantly slower (-99% speedup) due to a fundamental misunderstanding of the use case.
What changed:
time.sleep(0.00001)
withawait asyncio.sleep(0.00001)
import asyncio
Why this is slower:
The original code using
time.sleep()
was likely being called in a synchronous context where the 0.00001 second sleep was essentially negligible overhead. However,await asyncio.sleep()
introduces substantial async machinery overhead:await asyncio.sleep()
requires the async event loop to schedule a callback, context switch, and resume executionasyncio.sleep()
creates actual timers in the event loop, while the tinytime.sleep()
was likely optimized awayWhen this optimization would help:
This change only provides benefits when running many concurrent tasks simultaneously (like the
test_task_large_scale_concurrent
and throughput tests with 100+ tasks). In those scenarios, the non-blocking nature allows true concurrency rather than sequential execution.The fundamental issue:
If this code is primarily called sequentially or with low concurrency, the async overhead (1.80s vs 16.8ms) far outweighs any concurrency benefits. The optimization assumes high-concurrency usage patterns that may not match the actual use case.
✅ Correctness verification report:
🌀 Generated Regression Tests and Runtime
To edit these changes
git checkout codeflash/optimize-task-mfvna5iy
and push.