Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 9252063
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: June 18, 20262026-06-18T10:51:09+00:00 2026-06-18T10:51:09+00:00

When answering this question (and having read this answer to a similar question), I

  • 0

When answering this question (and having read this answer to a similar question), I thought that I knew how Python caches regexes.

But then I thought I’d test it, comparing two scenarios:

  1. a single compilation of a simple regex, then 10 applications of that compiled regex.
  2. 10 applications of an uncompiled regex (where I would have expected slightly worse performance because the regex would have to be compiled once, then cached, and then looked up in the cache 9 times).

However, the results were staggering (in Python 3.3):

>>> import timeit
>>> timeit.timeit(setup="import re", 
... stmt='r=re.compile(r"\w+")\nfor i in range(10):\n r.search("  jkdhf  ")')
18.547793477671938
>>> timeit.timeit(setup="import re", 
... stmt='for i in range(10):\n re.search(r"\w+","  jkdhf  ")')
106.47892003890324

That’s over 5.7 times slower! In Python 2.7, there is still an increase by a factor of 2.5, which is also more than I would have expected.

Has caching of regexes changed between Python 2 and 3? The docs don’t seem to suggest that.

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-06-18T10:51:10+00:00Added an answer on June 18, 2026 at 10:51 am

    The code has changed.

    In Python 2.7, the cache is a simple dictionary; if more than _MAXCACHE items are stored in it, the whole the cache is cleared before storing a new item. A cache lookup only takes building a simple key and testing the dictionary, see the 2.7 implementation of _compile()

    In Python 3.x, the cache has been replaced by the @functools.lru_cache(maxsize=500, typed=True) decorator. This decorator does much more work and includes a thread-lock, adjusting the cache LRU queue and maintaining the cache statistics (accessible via re._compile.cache_info()). See the 3.3.0 implementation of _compile() and of functools.lru_cache().

    Others have noticed the same slowdown, and filed issue 16389 in the Python bugtracker. I’d expect 3.4 to be a lot faster again; either the lru_cache implementation is improved or the re module will move to a custom cache again.

    Update: With revision 4b4dddd670d0 (hg) / 0f606a6 (git) the cache change has been reverted back to the simple version found in 3.1. Python versions 3.2.4 and 3.3.1 include that revision.

    Since then, in Python 3.7 the pattern cache was updated to a custom FIFO cache implementation based on a regular dict (relying on insertion order, and unlike a LRU, does not take into account how recently items already in the cache were used when evicting).

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

I'm asking and answering this question so that I can find it again in
Please bear in mind that I'm totally new to Rails when answering this.My question
Sorry this is a basic question, but all my research just barely missed answering
Before answering this question, understand that I am not asking how to create my
This post goes some way to answering this question (I'll include the answer later),
I have never used JodaTime before, but answering this question, How to get ordinal
So, I was playing around with Python while answering this question , and I
In answering this question please take into consideration the fact that I'm an Android
In answering this question , I came across a situation that I don't understand.
In answering this question , I suggested that the OP open a stream at

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.