Optimizing the dict

This is another of those memory conservation stories on the PS3.

Our engineers were worried about how much memory was being spent/wasted in dictionaries. Python dicts are these sparse datastructures, optimized for performance and trading off memory usage to achieve speed.

This code shows you the memory used by dicts of various sizes:

for i in range(20): print i, sys.getsizeof(dict((j,j) for j in range(i)))
0 148
1 148
2 148
3 148
4 148
5 148
6 532
7 532
8 532
9 532
10 532
11 532
12 532
13 532
14 532
15 532
16 532
17 532
18 532
19 532

It’s rather striking that a 10 element dict on a 32 bit is consuming more than 1/2k of memory. I’m pretty sure BBC Basic can’t have used dicts.

Now, I was interested in tuning the dict implementation for the PS3, sacrificing performance for memory. Looking at the code led me to a file called dictnotes.txt explaining much about dicts. The section on tuning only considers performance. Too sparse a dict, you see, looses performance because of memory cache effects. Otherwise, I’m sure, we would want dicts infinitely sparse.

It turns out that only one parameter is easily tunable, PyDict_MINSIZE. Python 2.7 sets this to 8 for reasons of cache line size, although I find that an odd generalization across a huge number of platforms. in dictobject.h, I came across this comment:

* PyDict_MINSIZE is the minimum size of a dictionary. This many slots are
* allocated directly in the dict object (in the ma_smalltable member).
* It must be a power of 2, and at least 4.

It turns out this is wrong. Python will happily run with it set to 1.

As for the other tunable parameters, I ended up macrofying things that were hard-coded in various places in the code:

/* CCP change: Tunable parameters for dict growth */
/* Save memory for dust */
#define _PyDICT_MAX_LOAD_NUM 4 /* grow at 80% load */

#define _PyDICT_GROWTHRATE_NUM 3 /* scale by 1.5 */
/* max load 2/3, default python: */
#define _PyDICT_MAX_LOAD_NUM 2

#define _PyDICT_GROWTHRATE_NUM (mp->ma_used > 50000 ? 2 : 4)

And then later:

#if 0
    if (!(mp->ma_used > n_used && mp->ma_fill*3 >= (mp->ma_mask+1)*2))
        return 0;
    return dictresize(mp, (mp->ma_used > 50000 ? 2 : 4) * mp->ma_used);
    /* CCP change, tunable growth parameters */
    if (!(mp->ma_used > n_used && mp->ma_fill*_PyDICT_MAX_LOAD_DENOM >= (mp->ma_mask+1)*_PyDICT_MAX_LOAD_NUM))
        return 0;
    return dictresize(mp, _PyDICT_GROWTHRATE_NUM * mp->ma_used / _PyDICT_GROWTHRATE_DENOM);

By using a smalltable of size 1, setting the max fill rate to 4/5 and growth rate to 1.5, we get this:
for i in range(20): print i, sys.getsizeof(dict((j,j) for j in range(i)))

0 64
1 88
2 112
3 160
4 160
5 160
6 256
7 256
8 256
9 256
10 256
11 256
12 448
13 448
14 448
15 448
16 448
17 448
18 448
19 448

The size of the dicts is still governed by the fact that the tables must have sizes that are powers of two, so we can only delay the onset of growth. But at least we get rid of the super optimistic quadruple growth factor and the large small table.

Perhaps a different, again less optimal, version of the dict wouldn’t have that power of two requirement. There is no inherent need for that when hashing except that it makes for nice bitwise arithmetic.


The effect these changes had:

I just do a quick test. It saved 2MB in login screen. That’s awesome.


Kevin Zhang

Reference cycles with closures

Polishing our forthcoming console game, our team in Shanghai are relentlessly trying to minimize python memory use.
Today, an engineer complained to me that “cell” objects were being leaked(*).

This rang a bell with me. In 2009, I had posted about this to python-dev.
The response at the time wasn’t very sympathetic. I should be doing stuff differently or simply rely on the cyclic garbage collector and not try to be clever. Yet, as I pointed out, parts of the library are aware of the problem and do help you with these things, such as the xml.dom.minidom.unlink() method.

The data being leaked now appeared to pertain to the json module:

[2861.88] Python: 0: <bound method JSONEncoder.default of <json.encoder.JSONEncoder object at 0x12e14010>>
[2861.88] Python: 1: <bound method JSONEncoder.default of <json.encoder.JSONEncoder object at 0x12e14010>>
[2861.88] Python: 2: <bound method JSONEncoder.default of <json.encoder.JSONEncoder object at 0x12e14010>>

This prompted me to have a look in the json module, and behold, json.encoder contains this pattern:
def _make_iterencode(…)

def _iterencode(o, _current_indent_level):
if isinstance(o, basestring):
yield _encoder(o)
elif o is None:
yield ‘null’
elif o is True:
yield ‘true’
elif o is False:
yield ‘false’
elif isinstance(o, (int, long)):
yield str(o)
elif isinstance(o, float):
yield _floatstr(o)
elif isinstance(o, (list, tuple)):
for chunk in _iterencode_list(o, _current_indent_level):
yield chunk
elif isinstance(o, dict):
for chunk in _iterencode_dict(o, _current_indent_level):
yield chunk
if markers is not None:
markerid = id(o)
if markerid in markers:
raise ValueError(“Circular reference detected”)
markers[markerid] = o
o = _default(o)
for chunk in _iterencode(o, _current_indent_level):
yield chunk
if markers is not None:
del markers[markerid]

return _iterencode

The problem is this: The returned closure has a func_closure() member containing the “cell” objects, one of which points to this function. There is no way to clear the func_closure method after use. And so, iterencoding stuff using the json module causes reference cycles that persist until the next collection, possibly causing python to hang on to all the data that was supposed to be encoded and then thrown away.

Looking for a workaround, I wrote this code, emulating part of what is going on:
def itertest(o):
def listiter(l):
for i in l:
if isinstance(i, list):
chunks = listiter(i)
for i in chunks:
yield i
yield i
return listiter(o)

Testing it, confirmed the problem:

>>> import celltest
>>> l = [1, [2, 3]]
>>> import gc, celltest
>>> gc.collect()
>>> gc.set_debug(gc.DEBUG_LEAK)
>>> l = [1, [2, 3]]
>>> i = celltest.itertest(l)
>>> list(i)
[1, 2, 3]
>>> gc.collect()
gc: collectable <cell 01E96B50>
gc: collectable <function 01E97330>
gc: collectable <tuple 01E96910>
gc: collectable <cell 01E96B30>
gc: collectable <tuple 01E96950>
gc: collectable <function 01E973F0>

To fix this, it is necessary to clear the “cell” objects once there is no more need for them. It is not possible to do this from the outside, so how about from the inside? Changing the code to:
def itertest2(o):
def listiter(l):
for i in l:
if isinstance(i, list):
chunks = listiter(i)
for i in chunks:
yield i
yield i

chunks = listiter(o)
for i in chunks:
yield i
chunks = listiter = None
Does the trick. the function becomes a generator, yields the stuff, then cleans up:

>>> o = celltest.itertest2(l)
>>> list(o)
[1, 2, 3]
>>> gc.collect()

It is an unfortunate situation. The workaround requires work to be done inside the function. It would be cool if it were possible to clear the function’s closure by calling, e.g. func.close(). As it is, people have to be aware of these hidden cycles and code carfully around them.

(*) Leaking in this case means not being released immediately by reference counting but lingering. We don’t want to rely on the gc module’s quirkiness in a video game.


In my toy code, I got the semantics slightly wrong.  Actually, it is more like this:
def make_iter():
def listiter(l):
for i in l:
if isinstance(i, list):
chunks = listiter(i)
for i in chunks:
yield i
yield i
return listiter

def get_iterator(data):
it = make_iter()
return it(data)

This complicates things. Nowhere is, during iteration, any code running in the scope of make_iter that we can use to clear those locals after iteration. Everything is running in nested functions and since I am using Python 2.7 (which doesn’t have the “nonlocal” keyword) there seems to be no way to clear the outer locals from the inner functions once iteration is done.

I guess that means that I’ll have to modify this code to use class objects instead.

Also, while on the topic, I think Raymond Hettinger’s class-like objects are subject to this problem if they have any sort of mutual or recursive relationship among their “members”.

Clearing weakrefs

I just had this problem which would have been elegantly solved with the ability to manually clear weak references pointing to an object. I am (for technical reasons) recycling an object, so instead of killing it and re-creating it, I re-initialize it. But that leaves old weak references in place. How nice wouldn’t it be to be able to call “myobject.clear_weakrefs()”?

Float object reuse

I thought I’d mention a cool little patch we did to Python some years back.

We work with database tables a lot.  Game configuration data is essentially rows in a vast database.  And those rows contain a lot of floats.  At some point I recognized that common float values were not being reused.  In particular, id(0.0) != id(0.0).  I was a bit surprized by this, since I figured, some floats must be more common than others.  Certainly, 0.0 is a bit special.

I mentioned this on python-dev some years back but with somewhat underwhelming results.  A summary of the discussion can be found here.

Anyway, I thought I’d mention this to people doing a lot of floating point.  We saved a huge amount of memory on our servers just caching integral floating point values between -10 and +10, including both the negative and positive 0.0.  These values are very frequent, for example as multipliers in tables, and so on.

Here’s some of the code:


PyObject *
PyFloat_FromDouble(double fval)
    register PyFloatObject *op;
    int ival;
    if (free_list == NULL) {
        if ((free_list = fill_free_list()) == NULL)
            return NULL;
        /* CCP addition, cache common values */
        if (!f_reuse[0]) {
            int i;
            for(i = 0; i<21; i++)
                f_reuse[i] = PyFloat_FromDouble((double)(i-10));
    /* CCP addition, check for recycling */
    ival = (int)fval;
    if ((double)ival == fval && ival>=-10 && ival <= 10) {
        /* ignore the negative zero */
        if (ival || _fpclass(fval) != _FPCLASS_NZ) {
        /* can't differentiate between positive and negative zeroes, ignore both */
        if (ival) {
            if (f_reuse[ival]) {
                return f_reuse[ival];

    /* Inline PyObject_New */
    op = free_list;
    free_list = (PyFloatObject *)Py_TYPE(op);
    PyObject_INIT(op, &PyFloat_Type);
    op->ob_fval = fval;
    return (PyObject *) op;


(Please excuse the lame syntax highlighter with its &amp; and &lt; thingies 🙂

Temporary thread state overhead

When doing IO, it is sometimes useful for a worker thread to notify Python that something has happened. Previously we have just had the Python main thread “Poll” some external variable for that, but recently we have been experimenting with having the main thread just grab the GIL and perform python work itself.

This should be straightforward. Python has an api called PyGILState_Ensure() that can be called on any thread. If that thread doesn’t already have a Python thread state, it will create a temporary one. Such a thread is sometimes called an external thread.

On a server loaded to some 40% with IO, this is what happened when I turned on this feature:

process cpu

The dark gray area is main thread CPU, (initially at around 40%) and the rest is other threads.  Turning on the “ThreadWakeup” feature adds some 20% extra cpu work to the process.

When the main thread is not working, it is idle doing a MsgWaitForMultipleObjects() Windows system call (with the GIL unclaimed).  So the worker thread should have no problem acquiring the GIL.  Further, there is only ever one woker thread doing a PyGILState_Ensure()/PyGILState_Release() at the same time, and this is ensured using locking on the worker thread side.

Further tests seem to confirm that if the worker thread already owns a Python thread state, and uses that to aquire the GIL (using a PyEval_RestoreThread() call) this overhead goes away.

This was surprising to me, but it seems to indicate that it is very expensive to “acquire a thread state on demand” to claim the GIL.  This is very unfortunate, because it means that one cannot easily use arbitrary system threads to call into Python without significant overhead.  These might be threads from the Windows thread pool for example, threads that we have no control over and therefore cannot assign thread state to.

I will try to investigate this furter, to see where the overhead is coming from.  It could be the extra TLS calls made, or simply the cost of malloc()/free() involved.  Depending on the results, there are a few options:

  1. Keep a single thread state on the side for (the single) external thread that can claim the GIL at a time, ready and initialized.
  2. Allow an external thread to ‘borrow’ another thread state and not use its own.
  3. Streamline the stuff already present.

Update, oct. 6th 2011:
Enabling dynamic GIL with tread state caching did notthing to solve this issue.
I think the problem is likely to be that spin locking is in effect for the GIL. I’ll see what happens if I explicitly define the GIL to not use spin locking.

namedtuple and exec()

In our port of Python 2.7 to the PS3 console, we have deliberately removed the python compiler. This was mainly done to save on the code size, since on a console every byte is sacred.  An additional benefit is slight hardening against certain kinds of attacks, since evil constructs such as eval() and exec() now raise the NotImplementedError when used.

Program code is pre-compiled and put in .zip archives so there is no need for regular compilation on the console. The most serious problem we encountered though, was with the new namedtuple construct.

The namedtuple is implemented in the collections module by constructing a class declaration with string interpolation and then calling exec() on it. With exec() removed, a lot of the standard library turned out to fail on import.

Our initial fix was simply to replace the namedtuples with regular tuples:
def namedtuple(typename, field_names, verbose=False, rename=False):
return tuple
This worked surprisingly well. The parts of the library we were using were still using namedtuples just like regular tuples and all was well.

Recently, however, we found that the urlparse module was making non-trivial use of it so something needed to be done.  My initial reflex was to dive in and reimplement it using a metaclass or some such. But then I thought of asking the internet.

It turns out that this exists as an issue in the Python bug tracker.  Someone else had come across this oddity in the standard library and submitted an alternative implementation.  This works perfectly for our purposes.

I know that there is nothing inherently evil about using exec in Python, but this particular case still doesn’t quite ring true to me:  If the best way to implement a class is by resorting to the meta-language, doesn’t that indicate some shortcoming in the language itself?