Aaron Sherman <a...@ajs.com> added the comment:

I think it's still safe to say that high performance applications which need to 
create many hundreds or thousands of children (e.g. large monitoring systems) 
will still need another solution that isn't subprocess. That being said, you're 
right that no one is going to care about the extra overhead of subprocess in a 
vacuum, and most applications fork one or a very small number of processes at a 
time and typically end up waiting for orders of magnitude more time for their 
output than they spend creating the process in the first place.

As I said when I opened this issue, I wasn't terribly concerned with most 
applications.

That being said, I can't really submit a full-blown monitoring system against 
this bug, so the best I could do would something that did lots of os.popens or 
subprocess.Popens in parallel in a contrived way and see how the performance 
scales as I tune "lots" to different values. Sadly, the time I have for doing 
that needs to be spent writing other code, so I'll leave this closed and let 
someone else raise the issue in the future if they run into it.

I can always build a dispatcher in C and communicate with it via IPC to get 
around the immediate concern of scalability.

----------

_______________________________________
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue11314>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

Reply via email to