On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 5:36 AM, Matej Stuchlik <mstuchli@redhat.com> wrote:
----- Original Message -----
> From: "drago01" <drago01@gmail.com>
> To: "Development discussions related to Fedora" <devel@lists.fedoraproject.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 11:20:27 AM
> Subject: Re: Fedora 23 cloud image (and, for that matter,     minimal anything) bloat
> On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 11:07 AM, Matej Stuchlik <mstuchli@redhat.com> wrote:
> > [...]
> > When it comes to python3, one way to shave off ~9MiB from python3-libs, and
> > possibly quite a bit more overall, would be to not install both optimized
> > and
> > unoptimized bytecode, as we do now, but just the unoptimized one (the
> > performance
> > hit should be very small).
> How small is "very small" ? Have you measured it?
> I don't think 9MB of disk space is worth taking a performance hit for ...

The only difference between unoptimized and "optimized" bytecode should be that
the latter is missing all docstrings, has disable asserts and sets __debug__ to False,
I can't imagine this being significant, performance wise.

That said I do not plan on doing this before I measure the performance difference and
discuss it on python-sig and python-linux.

Also note that it's possibly not just 9MB. For instance python3-boto, also on this list, would
save 4.7MB, python3-pip 2.9MB. In general most python packages could go down in size by ~20-30%.


​However, this approach would break with Python 3.5 (where pyo data is merged into *.pyc data), so I would consider it an ill-advised approach anyway.​ It may work for F23, but it won't work for F24, and then we'd be back to square one again.

真実はいつも一つ!/ Always, there's only one truth!