Cameron Simpson <c...@zip.com.au> wrote: > Currently all the above is somewhat "batchy"; the client end looks like > an archiving command line tool, but it's intended to have a FUSE mode to > present the archive as a filesystem; that I can imagine tripping over > this issue as a user uses the filesystem for "stuff".
Me, too :-). Though I also do a lot of processing in pure Python... > Still, it is unusual and I suspect it will self limit to an extent > anyway; I can't fairly claim to have had it cause me trouble yet. > (Indeed, I've not used the new GIL at all - it's mostly using python > 2.6). The old GIL is causing me a great deal of grief. My server is heavily threaded, and when I get a number of Python 2.6 threads doing layout analysis, my 4 and 8 core machines turn into slow thrashers. I'm dismayed that the backport of the new GIL work to the 2.x line has been stopped (see issue 7753); I see a future of OS X 10.7 with presumably 64-bit Python 2.7 on, say, 32-core machines running even more slowly than it currently does. That's a pretty hard-core backwards compatibility decision. Maybe the Mac-SIG should adopt that patch... Bill _______________________________________________ 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
