FYI: I shot an email to stdlib-sig about the fact I am proposing the inclusion of the pyProcessing module into the stdlib. Comments and thoughts regarding that would be welcome. I've got a rough outline of the PEP, but I need to spend more time with the code examples.
-jesse On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 9:52 PM, Alex Martelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hmmm, sorry if I'm missing something obvious, but, if the occasional > background computations are sufficiently heavy -- why not fork, do > said computations in the child thread, and return the results via any > of the various available IPC approaches? I've recently (at Pycon, > mostly) been playing devil's advocate (i.e., being PRO-threads, for > once) on the subject of utilizing multiple cores effectively -- but > the classic approach (using multiple _processes_ instead) actually > works quite well in many cases, and this application server would > appear to be one. (the pyProcessing package appears to offer an easy > way to migrate threaded code to multiple-processes approaches, > although I've only played around with it, not [yet] used it for > production code). > > > Alex > > > > On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 10:49 AM, Adam Olsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 11:25 AM, Stefan Ring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Adam Olsen <rhamph <at> gmail.com> writes: > > > > > > > > > > So you want responsiveness when idle but throughput when busy? > > > > > > Exactly ;) > > > > > > > > > > Are those calculations primarily python code, or does a C library do > > > > the grunt work? If it's a C library you shouldn't be affected by > > > > safethread's increased overhead. > > > > > > > > > > It's Python code all the way. Frankly, it's a huge mess, but it would > be very > > > very hard to come up with a scalable solution that would allow to > optimize > > > certain hotspots and redo them in C or C++. There isn't even anything > left to > > > optimize in particular because all those low hanging fruit have > already been > > > taken care of. So it's just ~30kloc Python code over which the total > time spent > > > is quite uniformly distributed :(. > > > > I see. Well, at this point I think the most you can do is file a bug > > so the problem doesn't get forgotten. If nothing else, if my > > safethread stuff goes in it'll very likely include a --with-gil > > option, so I may put together a FIFO scheduler. > > > > > > -- > > Adam Olsen, aka Rhamphoryncus > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Python-Dev mailing list > > Python-Dev@python.org > > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev > > Unsubscribe: > http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/aleaxit%40gmail.com > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Python-Dev mailing list > Python-Dev@python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev > Unsubscribe: > http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/jnoller%40gmail.com > _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
