ciso8601 性能对比 datetime 默认库

In [1]: import datetime, aniso8601, iso8601, isodate, dateutil.parser, arrow, ciso8601



In [2]: ds = u'2014-01-09T21:48:00.921000'



In [3]: %timeit ciso8601.parse_datetime(ds)

1000000 loops, best of 3: 204 ns per loop



In [4]: %timeit datetime.datetime.strptime(ds, "%Y-%m-%dT%H:%M:%S.%f")

100000 loops, best of 3: 15 µs per loop



In [5]: %timeit dateutil.parser.parse(ds)

10000 loops, best of 3: 122 µs per loop



In [6]: %timeit aniso8601.parse_datetime(ds)

10000 loops, best of 3: 28.9 µs per loop



In [7]: %timeit iso8601.parse_date(ds)

10000 loops, best of 3: 42 µs per loop



In [8]: %timeit isodate.parse_datetime(ds)

10000 loops, best of 3: 69.4 µs per loop



In [9]: %timeit arrow.get(ds).datetime

10000 loops, best of 3: 87 µs per loop

In [1]: import datetime, aniso8601, iso8601, isodate, dateutil.parser, arrow, ciso8601



In [2]: ds = u'2014-01-09T21:48:00.921000+05:30'



In [3]: %timeit ciso8601.parse_datetime(ds)

1000000 loops, best of 3: 525 ns per loop



In [4]: %timeit dateutil.parser.parse(ds)

10000 loops, best of 3: 162 µs per loop



In [5]: %timeit aniso8601.parse_datetime(ds)

10000 loops, best of 3: 36.8 µs per loop



In [6]: %timeit iso8601.parse_date(ds)

10000 loops, best of 3: 53.5 µs per loop



In [7]: %timeit isodate.parse_datetime(ds)

10000 loops, best of 3: 82.6 µs per loop



In [8]: %timeit arrow.get(ds).datetime

10000 loops, best of 3: 104 µs per loop

Even with time zone information, ciso8601 is 70x as fast as aniso8601.

Tested on Python 2.7.10 on macOS 10.12.6 using the following modules: