Does anybody think that by having problems with the new GIL that it might further weaken the adoption rate for 3k? -peter
On 5/19/10 7:00 AM, "David Beazley" <d...@dabeaz.com> wrote: >> From: "Martin v. L?wis" <mar...@v.loewis.de> >> To: Dj Gilcrease <digitalx...@gmail.com> >> Cc: python-dev@python.org >> Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] Fixing the GIL (with a BFS scheduler) >> Message-ID: <4bf385e3.9030...@v.loewis.de> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 >> >>> I think the new GIL should be given a year or so in the wild before >>> you start trying to optimize theoretical issues you may run into. If >>> in a year people come back and have some examples of where a proper >>> scheduler would help improve speed on multi-core systems even more, >>> then we can address the issue at that time. >> >> Exactly my feelings. >> > > Although I don't agree that the problem of I/O convoying is merely some > "theoretical issue", I would agree with a go-slow approach---after all, the > new GIL hasn't even appeared in any actual release yet. It might be a good > idea to prominently document the fact that the new GIL has some known > performance issues (e.g., possible I/O convoying), but that feedback > concerning the performance of real-world applications is desired. > > Cheers, > Dave > > _______________________________________________ > 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/peter.a.portante%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
