-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Antoine Pitrou wrote: > Tres Seaver <tseaver <at> palladion.com> writes: >> Yup, but that's true for *any* POSIXy envirnnment, not just Python. The >> only sane non-exec mixture is to have a single-thread parent fork, and >> restrict spawning threads to the children. > > The problem is that we're advocating multiprocessing as the solution for > multiprocessor scalability. We can't just say "oh and, by the way, shouldn't > use > it with several threads, hope you don't mind".
I think it is perfectly reasonable to say, "Oh, by the way, *don't* spawn any threads before calling fork(), or else exec() a new process immediately": wishing won't make the underlying realities any different. Note that the "we" in your sentence is not anything like the "quod semper quod ubique quod ab omnibus" criterion for accepting dogma: mutliprocessing is a tool, and needs to be used according to its nature, just as with threading. Tres. - -- =================================================================== Tres Seaver +1 540-429-0999 tsea...@palladion.com Palladion Software "Excellence by Design" http://palladion.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAktniWgACgkQ+gerLs4ltQ7c6wCfZ9ohkbehfU5fbOfwH+l7jVX0 6WwAn1ZywfDsIJCB0KS0/DPwaiPq1LNJ =86yK -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ 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
