How to Benchmark Python Code?

Choosing our Benchmarking Strategy

We are going to use pytest-codspeed because it integrates seamlessly with pytest, the most popular Python testing framework. Your benchmarks live right alongside your tests using the same familiar syntax, no separate infrastructure to maintain. Plus, all of pytest’s ecosystem (parametrization, fixtures, plugins) works seamlessly with your benchmarks. You can even turn existing tests into benchmarks by adding a single decorator.

If you’re wondering whether to use command-line tools like time or hyperfine versus integrated frameworks like pytest-codspeed, check out our Choosing the Right Python Benchmarking Strategy guide for a detailed comparison.

Your First Benchmark

Let’s start by creating a simple benchmark for a recursive Fibonacci function.

Installation

First, add pytest-codspeed to your project’s dependencies using uv:

uv add --dev pytest-codspeed

Don’t have uv?You can use pip install pytest-codspeed instead. uv is a modern, fast Python package manager that we recommend for new projects, but any package manager works fine.

Writing the Benchmark

Create a new file tests/test_benchmarks.py:

tests/test_benchmarks.py

import pytest

# Define the function we want to benchmark
def fibonacci(n: int) -> int:
    if n <= 1:
        return n
    else:
        return fibonacci(n - 2) + fibonacci(n - 1)

# Register a simple benchmark using the pytest marker
@pytest.mark.benchmark
def test_fib_bench():
    result = fibonacci(30)
    assert result == 832040

A few things to note: @pytest.mark.benchmark is a standard pytest marker that marks this test as a benchmark. The entire test function is measured, including both the computation and the assertion. It’s just a regular pytest test, so you can run it with pytest as usual. The test validates correctness (via assertions) and tracks performance at the same time.

Running the Benchmark

Now run your benchmark:

uv run pytest tests/ --codspeed

What does --codspeed do?This flag activates CodSpeed’s benchmarking engine to collect performance measurements. Without it, pytest runs your tests normally without gathering performance data. If you’re not using uv, simply run pytest tests/ --codspeed instead.

You should see output like this:

=============================== test session starts ===============================
platform darwin -- Python 3.13.3, pytest-8.4.2, pluggy-1.6.0
codspeed: 4.2.0 (enabled, mode: walltime, callgraph: not supported, timer_resolution: 41.7ns)
CodSpeed had to disable the following plugins: pytest-benchmark
benchmark: 5.2.1 (defaults: timer=time.perf_counter disable_gc=False min_rounds=5 min_time=0.000005 max_time=1.0 calibration_precision=10 warmup=False warmup_iterations=100000)
rootdir: /Users/user/projects/CodSpeedHQ/docs-guides/python
configfile: pyproject.toml
plugins: benchmark-5.2.1, codspeed-4.2.0
collected 1 item

tests/test_benchmarks.py .                                                  [100%]

                        Benchmark Results
┏━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━┳━━━━━━━━━━━━━┳━━━━━━━━━━━━━┳━━━━━━━━━━┳━━━━━━━┓
┃      Benchmark ┃ Time (best) ┃ Rel. StdDev ┃ Run time ┃ Iters ┃
┡━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━╇━━━━━━━━━━━━━╇━━━━━━━━━━━━━╇━━━━━━━━━━╇━━━━━━━┩
│ test_fib_bench │      73.1ms │        2.1% │    2.96s │    40 │
└────────────────┴─────────────┴─────────────┴──────────┴───────┘

================================== 1 benchmarked ==================================

================================ 1 passed in 4.09s ================================

Congratulations! You’ve created your first benchmark. Here in this output, you can see that test_fib_bench takes about 73 milliseconds to compute fibonacci(30). It ran 40 times in 2.96 seconds to get a reliable measurement.

Understanding the results:

Time (best): The fastest single iteration - this is your function’s performance (lower is better)
Rel. StdDev: Relative standard deviation - measures consistency between runs (lower means more reliable results)
Run time: Total time spent running the benchmark
Iters: How many times your code ran - automatically adjusted based on speed (fast code runs more times for accuracy)

Benchmarking with Arguments

So far, we’ve only tested our function with a single input value (30). But what if we want to see how performance changes with different input sizes? This is where pytest’s @pytest.mark.parametrize comes in, and it works seamlessly with benchmarks! Let’s update our benchmark to test multiple input sizes:

tests/test_benchmarks.py

@pytest.mark.benchmark
@pytest.mark.parametrize("n", [5, 10, 15, 20, 30])
def test_fib_parametrized(n):
    result = fibonacci(n)
    assert result > 0

When you run this benchmark, pytest will create separate test instances for each parameter value, allowing you to compare performance across different inputs:

=============================== test session starts ===============================
platform darwin -- Python 3.13.3, pytest-8.4.2, pluggy-1.6.0
codspeed: 4.2.0 (enabled, mode: walltime, callgraph: not supported, timer_resolution: 41.7ns)
CodSpeed had to disable the following plugins: pytest-benchmark
benchmark: 5.2.1 (defaults: timer=time.perf_counter disable_gc=False min_rounds=5 min_time=0.000005 max_time=1.0 calibration_precision=10 warmup=False warmup_iterations=100000)
rootdir: /Users/user/projects/CodSpeedHQ/docs-guides/python
configfile: pyproject.toml
plugins: benchmark-5.2.1, codspeed-4.2.0
collected 5 items

tests/test_benchmarks.py .....                                              [100%]

                               Benchmark Results
┏━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━┳━━━━━━━━━━━━━┳━━━━━━━━━━━━━┳━━━━━━━━━━┳━━━━━━━━━━━┓
┃                 Benchmark ┃ Time (best) ┃ Rel. StdDev ┃ Run time ┃     Iters ┃
┡━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━╇━━━━━━━━━━━━━╇━━━━━━━━━━━━━╇━━━━━━━━━━╇━━━━━━━━━━━┩
│  test_fib_parametrized[5] │         0ns │        1.7% │    2.92s │ 1,026,802 │
│ test_fib_parametrized[10] │         1ns │        1.7% │    2.89s │   395,754 │
│ test_fib_parametrized[15] │        76ns │        0.8% │    2.94s │    52,256 │
│ test_fib_parametrized[20] │      8.49µs │        3.6% │    3.00s │     4,970 │
│ test_fib_parametrized[30] │      72.9ms │        0.7% │    2.94s │        40 │
└───────────────────────────┴─────────────┴─────────────┴──────────┴───────────┘

================================== 5 benchmarked ==================================

=============================== 5 passed in 19.88s ================================

Notice how parametrization creates five separate benchmarks, one for each input value. The results reveal the exponential time complexity of our recursive Fibonacci implementation: fibonacci(5) takes virtually no time (0ns) and runs over 1 million iterations, while fibonacci(30) takes 72.9ms and runs only 40 times. This dramatic difference (from nanoseconds to milliseconds) demonstrates how quickly recursive Fibonacci becomes expensive as the input grows.

Multiple Parameters

You can also benchmark across multiple dimensions:

tests/test_benchmarks.py

def fibonacci_iterative(n: int) -> int:
    if n <= 1:
        return 1
    a, b = 1, 1
    for _ in range(n - 1):
        a, b = b, a + b
    return b

@pytest.mark.benchmark
@pytest.mark.parametrize("algorithm, n", [
    ("recursive", 10),
    ("recursive", 20),
    ("iterative", 100),
    ("iterative", 200),
])
def test_fib_algorithms(algorithm, n):
    if algorithm == "recursive":
        result = fibonacci(n)
    else:
        result = fibonacci_iterative(n)
    assert result > 0

Then run it:

=============================== test session starts ===============================
platform darwin -- Python 3.13.3, pytest-8.4.2, pluggy-1.6.0
codspeed: 4.2.0 (enabled, mode: walltime, callgraph: not supported, timer_resolution: 41.7ns)
CodSpeed had to disable the following plugins: pytest-benchmark
benchmark: 5.2.1 (defaults: timer=time.perf_counter disable_gc=False min_rounds=5 min_time=0.000005 max_time=1.0 calibration_precision=10 warmup=False warmup_iterations=100000)
rootdir: /Users/user/projects/CodSpeedHQ/docs-guides/python
configfile: pyproject.toml
plugins: benchmark-5.2.1, codspeed-4.2.0
collected 4 items

tests/test_benchmarks.py ....                                               [100%]

                                 Benchmark Results
┏━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━┳━━━━━━━━━━┳━━━━━━━━━━━┳━━━━━━━━━━┳━━━━━━━━━━┓
┃                                    ┃     Time ┃      Rel. ┃          ┃          ┃
┃                          Benchmark ┃   (best) ┃    StdDev ┃ Run time ┃    Iters ┃
┡━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━╇━━━━━━━━━━╇━━━━━━━━━━━╇━━━━━━━━━━╇━━━━━━━━━━┩
│  test_fib_algorithms[recursive-10] │      1ns │      1.0% │    2.93s │  614,789 │
│  test_fib_algorithms[recursive-20] │   8.49µs │     26.9% │    3.01s │    4,970 │
│ test_fib_algorithms[iterative-100] │      0ns │     42.1% │    3.04s │ 1,474,1… │
│ test_fib_algorithms[iterative-200] │      0ns │      1.3% │    2.29s │  587,099 │
└────────────────────────────────────┴──────────┴───────────┴──────────┴──────────┘

================================== 4 benchmarked ==================================

=============================== 4 passed in 15.40s ================================

This benchmark creates four separate test cases, one for each combination of algorithm and input size. The output clearly shows the dramatic performance difference between the two implementations: the iterative version handles much larger inputs (100, 200) in virtually no time, while the recursive version takes 8.49µs just for n=20. Notice how fibonacci_iterative(200) runs over 500,000 iterations in the same time budget that fibonacci(20) only manages about 5,000. This makes it easy to compare different algorithmic approaches and choose the most efficient implementation for your use case.

Benchmarking Only What Matters

Sometimes, you have expensive setup that shouldn’t be included in your benchmark measurements. For example, generating large datasets, creating complex data structures, or preparing test data. This is where the benchmark fixture comes in. The benchmark fixture gives you precise control over what gets measured. Let’s benchmark a data analysis function that identifies outliers in numerical data. The expensive part is generating the test dataset, but we only want to measure the outlier detection algorithm:

tests/test_outlier_detection.py

import pytest
import random

def generate_dataset(size: int) -> list[float]:
    """Generate a large dataset with some outliers (expensive operation)."""
    random.seed(42)  # Fixed seed for reproducibility

    data = []
    for _ in range(size):
        # 95% normal values from a normal distribution
        if random.random() < 0.95:
            data.append(random.gauss(100.0, 15.0))
        else:
            # 5% outliers
            data.append(random.uniform(200.0, 300.0))

    return data

def detect_outliers(data: list[float], threshold: float = 2.0) -> list[int]:
    """Detect outliers using z-score method (what we want to benchmark)."""
    # Calculate mean
    mean = sum(data) / len(data)

    # Calculate standard deviation
    variance = sum((x - mean) ** 2 for x in data) / len(data)
    std_dev = variance ** 0.5

    # Find outliers
    outliers = []
    for i, value in enumerate(data):
        z_score = abs((value - mean) / std_dev) if std_dev > 0 else 0
        if z_score > threshold:
            outliers.append(i)

    return outliers

# Benchmark for dataset generation
@pytest.mark.benchmark
@pytest.mark.parametrize("size", [10_000, 100_000, 1_000_000])
def test_generate_dataset(size):
    generate_dataset(size)

# Benchmark for outlier detection only
@pytest.mark.parametrize("size", [10_000, 100_000, 1_000_000])
def test_outlier_detection(benchmark, size):
    # NOT MEASURED: Expensive setup - generate large dataset
    dataset = generate_dataset(size)

    # MEASURED: Only the outlier detection algorithm
    result = benchmark(detect_outliers, dataset)

    # NOT MEASURED: Assertions
    assert len(result) > 0  # We should find some outliers
    assert all(isinstance(idx, int) for idx in result)

The setup code (generating the dataset) runs once, and only the detect_outliers() call inside benchmark() is measured. This gives you accurate performance data without the noise of test setup. Let’s run this benchmark by filtering the pytest command to just this file:

uv run pytest tests/test_outlier_detection.py --codspeed

You should see output like this:

=============================== test session starts ===============================
platform darwin -- Python 3.13.3, pytest-8.4.2, pluggy-1.6.0
codspeed: 4.2.0 (enabled, mode: walltime, callgraph: not supported, timer_resolution: 41.7ns)
CodSpeed had to disable the following plugins: pytest-benchmark
benchmark: 5.2.1 (defaults: timer=time.perf_counter disable_gc=False min_rounds=5 min_time=0.000005 max_time=1.0 calibration_precision=10 warmup=False warmup_iterations=100000)
rootdir: /Users/user/projects/CodSpeedHQ/docs-guides/python
configfile: pyproject.toml
plugins: benchmark-5.2.1, codspeed-4.2.0
collected 6 items

tests/test_outlier_detection.py ......                                      [100%]

                                Benchmark Results
┏━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━┳━━━━━━━━━━━━━┳━━━━━━━━━━━━━┳━━━━━━━━━━┳━━━━━━━┓
┃                       Benchmark ┃ Time (best) ┃ Rel. StdDev ┃ Run time ┃ Iters ┃
┡━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━╇━━━━━━━━━━━━━╇━━━━━━━━━━━━━╇━━━━━━━━━━╇━━━━━━━┩
│    test_generate_dataset[10000] │    124.29µs │        4.4% │    2.92s │ 1,278 │
│   test_generate_dataset[100000] │      11.0ms │        6.2% │    2.96s │   130 │
│  test_generate_dataset[1000000] │     225.5ms │       29.6% │    3.04s │    13 │
│   test_outlier_detection[10000] │     46.01µs │       18.4% │    2.89s │ 2,059 │
│  test_outlier_detection[100000] │       3.3ms │        6.1% │    3.04s │   220 │
│ test_outlier_detection[1000000] │     132.4ms │       12.6% │    3.04s │    22 │
└─────────────────────────────────┴─────────────┴─────────────┴──────────┴───────┘

================================== 6 benchmarked ==================================

=============================== 6 passed in 24.84s ================================

The results reveal a crucial insight about what we’re actually measuring. Notice the dramatic difference between the two benchmark groups: Dataset generation (test_generate_dataset):

10k elements: 124.29µs
100k elements: 11.0ms (88x slower)
1M elements: 225.5ms (1,814x slower than 10k)

Outlier detection (test_outlier_detection):

10k elements: 46.01µs
100k elements: 3.3ms (72x slower)
1M elements: 132.4ms (2,878x slower than 10k)

This comparison shows that for the 1M element dataset, dataset generation takes 225.5ms while outlier detection takes 132.4ms, the setup is actually slower than the algorithm we want to measure! Without using the benchmark fixture to exclude the setup, our measurements would include both operations, making it impossible to understand the true performance of the outlier detection algorithm. The benchmark fixture ensures we measure only what matters: the algorithm itself, not the test infrastructure around it.

Additional Techniques

Marking an Entire Module

If you have a dedicated benchmarks file, you can mark all tests as benchmarks at once using pytest’s module-level marking:

tests/benchmarks/test_math_operations.py

import pytest

# Mark all tests in this module as benchmarks
pytestmark = pytest.mark.benchmark

def test_sum_squares():
    # MEASURED: Everything in this test
    result = sum(i**2 for i in range(1000))
    assert result > 0

def test_sum_cubes():
    # MEASURED: Everything in this test
    result = sum(i**3 for i in range(1000))
    assert result > 0

Now all tests in this file are automatically benchmarked without individual decorators. This is incredibly useful for benchmark-specific test files!

Fine-Grained Control with Pedantic

For maximum control over your benchmarks, use benchmark.pedantic(). This allows you to specify custom setup and teardown functions, control the number of rounds and iterations, configure warmup behavior, and more:

tests/test_advanced.py

import json
import pytest

def parse_json_data(json_string: str) -> dict:
    """Parse JSON string into a dictionary."""
    return json.loads(json_string)

@pytest.mark.parametrize("size", [10_000, 30_000])
def test_json_parsing(benchmark, size):
    # NOT MEASURED: Setup to create test data
    items = [{"id": i, "name": f"item_{i}", "value": i * 10} for i in range(size)]
    json_string = json.dumps(items)

    # MEASURED: Only the parse_json_data() function
    result = benchmark.pedantic(
        parse_json_data,        # Function to benchmark
        args=(json_string,),    # Arguments to the function
        rounds=100,             # Number of benchmark rounds
        iterations=10,          # Iterations per round
        warmup_rounds=2         # Warmup rounds before measuring
    )

    # NOT MEASURED: The assertion
    assert len(result) == size

Here is the output when you run this benchmark:

=============================== test session starts ===============================
platform darwin -- Python 3.13.3, pytest-8.4.2, pluggy-1.6.0
codspeed: 4.2.0 (enabled, mode: walltime, callgraph: not supported, timer_resolution: 41.7ns)
CodSpeed had to disable the following plugins: pytest-benchmark
benchmark: 5.2.1 (defaults: timer=time.perf_counter disable_gc=False min_rounds=5 min_time=0.000005 max_time=1.0 calibration_precision=10 warmup=False warmup_iterations=100000)
rootdir: /Users/user/projects/CodSpeedHQ/docs-guides/python
configfile: pyproject.toml
plugins: benchmark-5.2.1, codspeed-4.2.0
collected 2 items

tests/test_advanced.py ..                                                   [100%]

                             Benchmark Results
┏━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━┳━━━━━━━━━━━━━┳━━━━━━━━━━━━━┳━━━━━━━━━━┳━━━━━━━┓
┃                Benchmark ┃ Time (best) ┃ Rel. StdDev ┃ Run time ┃ Iters ┃
┡━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━╇━━━━━━━━━━━━━╇━━━━━━━━━━━━━╇━━━━━━━━━━╇━━━━━━━┩
│ test_json_parsing[10000] │    294.85µs │        0.9% │    2.99s │ 1,000 │
│ test_json_parsing[30000] │    973.01µs │        0.7% │    9.88s │ 1,000 │
└──────────────────────────┴─────────────┴─────────────┴──────────┴───────┘

================================== 2 benchmarked ==================================

=============================== 2 passed in 13.20s ================================

We can see that as expected each benchmark ran 100 rounds of 10 iterations each, totalling 1,000 iterations. Using benchmark.pedantic() is especially useful for bigger benchmarks where you need precise control over rounds, iterations, and warmup behavior.

Best Practices

Use Assertions to Verify Correctness

Since benchmarks are just pytest tests, they should include assertions to verify correctness:

# ❌ BAD: No verification
@pytest.mark.benchmark
def test_computation():
    result = expensive_computation()
    # Oops, forgot to check if result is correct!

# ✅ GOOD: Verify the result without measuring the assertion
def test_computation(benchmark):
    result = benchmark(expensive_computation)
    assert result == expected_value

This ensures you’re benchmarking correct code, not broken code that happens to be fast. Or, as we briefly said in the introduction, you can turn existing tests into benchmarks by adding the @pytest.mark.benchmark decorator.

# Existing correctness test
def test_sorting_algorithm():
    data = [5, 2, 9, 1]
    result = sorting_algorithm(data)
    assert result == [1, 2, 5, 9]

# Turn it into a benchmark using the benchmark fixture
def test_sorting_algorithm(benchmark):
    data = [5, 2, 9, 1]
    result = benchmark(sorting_algorithm, data)
    assert result == [1, 2, 5, 9]

Keep Benchmarks Deterministic

Your benchmarks should produce consistent results across runs:

# ❌ BAD: Non-deterministic due to random data
def test_sort_random(benchmark):
    import random
    data = [random.randint(1, 1000) for _ in range(100)]
    benchmark(sorted, data)

# ✅ GOOD: Use a fixed seed or deterministic data
def test_sort_deterministic(benchmark):
    import random
    random.seed(42)  # Fixed seed for reproducibility
    data = [random.randint(1, 1000) for _ in range(100)]
    benchmark(sorted, data)

# ✅ EVEN BETTER: Use deterministic data
def test_sort_worst_case(benchmark):
    data = list(range(100, 0, -1))  # Always the same
    benchmark(sorted, data)

Benchmarking Your Own Package

Following Python best practices, your source code should live in a src/ directory. Here’s a typical project structure:

my_project/
├── pyproject.toml
├── src/
│   └── mylib/
│       ├── __init__.py
│       └── algorithms.py
└── tests/
    ├── test_algorithms.py        # Regular unit tests
    └── benchmarks/               # Performance benchmarks
        └── test_algorithm_performance.py

Your source code in src/mylib/algorithms.py:

src/mylib/algorithms.py

def quick_sort(arr: list[int]) -> list[int]:
    if len(arr) <= 1:
        return arr
    pivot = arr[len(arr) // 2]
    left = [x for x in arr if x < pivot]
    middle = [x for x in arr if x == pivot]
    right = [x for x in arr if x > pivot]
    return quick_sort(left) + middle + quick_sort(right)

Then benchmark it in your tests:

tests/benchmarks/test_algorithm_performance.py

from mylib.algorithms import quick_sort
import pytest

@pytest.mark.parametrize("size", [10, 100, 1000])
def test_quick_sort_performance(benchmark, size):
    # NOT MEASURED: Create test data
    data = list(range(size, 0, -1))

    # MEASURED: The sorting algorithm
    result = benchmark(quick_sort, data)

    # NOT MEASURED: Verify correctness
    assert result == list(range(1, size + 1))

Make sure your package is installed in development mode:

uv pip install -e .

Running Benchmarks Continuously with CodSpeed

So far, you’ve been running benchmarks locally. But local benchmarking has limitations:

Inconsistent hardware: Different developers get different results
Manual process: Easy to forget to run benchmarks before merging
No historical tracking: Hard to spot gradual performance degradation
No PR context: Can’t see performance impact during code review

This is where CodSpeed comes in. It runs your benchmarks automatically in CI and provides:

Automated performance regression detection in PRs
Consistent metrics with reliable measurements across all runs
Historical tracking to see performance over time with detailed charts
Flamegraph profiles to see exactly what changed in your code’s execution

How to set up CodSpeed with pytest-codspeed

Here’s how to integrate CodSpeed with your pytest-codspeed benchmarks:

Set Up GitHub Actions

Create a workflow file to run benchmarks on every push and pull request.

.github/workflows/codspeed.yml

name: CodSpeed Benchmarks

on:
  push:
    branches:
      - "main" # or "master"
  pull_request:
  # `workflow_dispatch` allows CodSpeed to trigger backtest
  # performance analysis in order to generate initial data.
  workflow_dispatch:

permissions: # optional for public repositories
  contents: read # required for actions/checkout
  id-token: write # required for OIDC authentication with CodSpeed
  
jobs:
  benchmarks:
    name: Run benchmarks
    runs-on: ubuntu-latest
    steps:
      - uses: actions/checkout@v5
      # ...
      # Setup your environment here:
      #  - Configure your Python/Rust/Node version
      #  - Install your dependencies
      #  - Build your benchmarks (if using a compiled language)
      # ...
      - name: Run the benchmarks
        uses: CodSpeedHQ/action@v4
        with:
          mode: simulation
          run: <Insert your benchmark command here>

Important: Use actions/setup-python to set up Python, not uv install. This is required for CodSpeed’s CPU simulation to work correctly.

Check the Results

Once the workflow runs, your pull requests will receive a performance report comment:

Access Detailed Reports and Flamegraphs

After your benchmarks run in CI, head over to your CodSpeed dashboard to see detailed performance reports, historical trends, and flamegraph profiles for deeper analysis.

Python Profiling Report on CodSpeed

Profiling works out of the box, no extra configuration needed!Learn more about flamegraphs and how to use them to optimize your code.

Next Steps

Check out these resources to continue your Python benchmarking journey:

Get Started with CodSpeed

CodSpeed Python Benchmarking Docs

Explore the full pytest-codspeed API reference

Choosing the Right Strategy

Learn when to use different Python benchmarking approaches

Performance Profiling

Learn how to use flamegraphs to optimize your code

How to Benchmark my Code?

Specialized Guides

How to Benchmark Python Code?

Choosing our Benchmarking Strategy

Your First Benchmark

Installation

Writing the Benchmark

Running the Benchmark

Benchmarking with Arguments

Multiple Parameters

Benchmarking Only What Matters

Additional Techniques

Marking an Entire Module

Fine-Grained Control with Pedantic

Best Practices

Use Assertions to Verify Correctness

Keep Benchmarks Deterministic

Benchmarking Your Own Package

Running Benchmarks Continuously with CodSpeed

How to set up CodSpeed with pytest-codspeed

Next Steps

Get Started with CodSpeed

CodSpeed Python Benchmarking Docs

Choosing the Right Strategy

Performance Profiling

How to Benchmark my Code?

Specialized Guides

​Choosing our Benchmarking Strategy

​Your First Benchmark

​Installation

​Writing the Benchmark

​Running the Benchmark

​Benchmarking with Arguments

​Multiple Parameters

​Benchmarking Only What Matters

​Additional Techniques

​Marking an Entire Module

​Fine-Grained Control with Pedantic

​Best Practices

​Use Assertions to Verify Correctness

​Keep Benchmarks Deterministic

​Benchmarking Your Own Package

​Running Benchmarks Continuously with CodSpeed

​How to set up CodSpeed with pytest-codspeed

​Next Steps

Get Started with CodSpeed

CodSpeed Python Benchmarking Docs

Choosing the Right Strategy

Performance Profiling

Choosing our Benchmarking Strategy

Your First Benchmark

Installation

Writing the Benchmark

Running the Benchmark

Benchmarking with Arguments

Multiple Parameters

Benchmarking Only What Matters

Additional Techniques

Marking an Entire Module

Fine-Grained Control with Pedantic

Best Practices

Use Assertions to Verify Correctness

Keep Benchmarks Deterministic

Benchmarking Your Own Package

Running Benchmarks Continuously with CodSpeed

How to set up CodSpeed with pytest-codspeed

Next Steps