On 10/9/07, Sebastian Haase replied: > > Did you find that locks > > or semaphores were needed? > Maybe that's why it crashed ;-) !? But for simple use it seems fine.
I just did some code (below) that does read/write to the array AFAP, and there is no crash, or any other issue (Win2000, py2.4, numpy 1.0b1). Without the print statements, it does max both processors; with printing I/O only 58%. Both processes can modify the array without issue either. I'll experiment with I had seen the Win mmap in this thread: http://objectmix.com/python/127666-shared-memory-pointer.html and here: http://www.codeproject.com/cpp/embedpython_2.asp Note also that the Python mmap docs read "In either case you must provide a file descriptor for a file opened for update." and no mention of the integer zero descriptor option. Access options behave as presented. Because *NIX has MAP_SHARED as an option you'd think that there might be cross-platform share behavior with some platform checking if statements. Without a tag though, how does another process reference the same memory on NIX, a filename? (It seems) > > But I had the same > > issue as Mark Heslep > > http://aspn.activestate.com/ASPN/Mail/Message/ctypes-users/3192422 > > of creating a numpy array from a raw address (not a c_array). >I assume this is a different issue, but haven't looked into it yet. Yes, a different methodology attempt. It would be interesting to know anyway how to create a numpy array from an address; it's probably buried in the undocumented C-API that I don't grok, and likely frowned upon. Thanks, Ray _______________________________________________ Numpy-discussion mailing list Numpy-discussion@scipy.org http://projects.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
