On Dec 29, 9:29 am, mk <mrk...@gmail.com> wrote: > Christian Heimes wrote: > > mk wrote: > >> Am I doing smth wrong in code below? Or do I have to use > >> multiprocessing.Pool to get any decent results? > > > You have missed an important point. A well designed application does > > neither create so many threads nor processes. > > Except I was not developing "well designed application" but writing the > test the goal of which was measuring the thread / process creation cost. > > > The creation of a thread > > or forking of a process is an expensive operation. > > Sure. The point is, how expensive? While still being relatively > expensive, it turns out that in Python creating a thread is much, much > cheaper than creating a process via multiprocessing on Linux, while this > seems to be not necessarily true on Mac OS X. > > > You should use a pool > > of threads or processes. > > Probably true, except, again, that was not quite the point of this > exercise.. > > > The limiting factor is not the creation time but the communication and > > synchronization overhead between multiple threads or processes. > > Which I am probably going to test as well.
I had an idea. You could use 'multiprocessing' for synchronization, and just use an mmap for the actual communication. (I think it's a good idea.) -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
