Charles-François Natali added the comment: > Through fork, yes, but "shared" rather than "copy-on-write".
There's a subtlety: because of refcounting, just treating a COW object as read-only (e.g. iteratin on the array) will trigger a copy anyway... > I assume you mean "shared memory" and shm_open(), not "semaphores" and > sem_open(). Yes ;-) > I don't think shm_open() really has any advantages over > using mmaps backed by "proper" files (since posix shared memeory uses up > space in /dev/shm which is limited). File-backed mmap() will incur disk I/O (although some of the data will probably sit in the page cache), which would be much slower than a shared memory. Also, you need corresponding disk space. As for the /dev/shm limit, it's normally dimensioned according to the amount of RAM, which is normally, which is in turn dimensioned according to the working set. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue17560> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
