4 ms·
Yes, but the Python garbage collector is only needed to handle cyclic references. Objects whose reference count drops to zero are still freed even with GC turn
by not2b 6y ago
Yes, but the Python garbage collector is only needed to handle cyclic references. Objects whose reference count drops to zero are still freed even with GC turned off. So AWS didn't make a mint from the experiment.
- saagarjha 6y agoI would also expect Instagram to be on Facebook's infrastructure these days ;)
- detaro 6y agoRight. The article describes them saving resources in the end from it, but I guess that was too reasonable for satire.
- pseudosavant 6y agoI'm sure the cost of getting all of the devs to write Python that safely runs without GC is far les than 10% of your AWS bill for Python services... Maybe at Instagram it is, but it won't be at 99% of companies. It isn't like most Python devs you interview are going to have any kind of a reasonable answer for "How would you write XYZ - with the GC disabled?" I'd bet the ones with a good answer cost >10% more on average.
- The_rationalist 6y agoSo swift using reference counting instead of a GC was BS marketing where the python approach (using both where it make sense) is a precedent and a superior solution?