Changes by Antoine Pitrou pit...@free.fr:
--
resolution: - out of date
stage: patch review - resolved
status: open - closed
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue17444
___
Antoine Pitrou added the comment:
The current os.cpu_count implementation calls sysconf(_SC_NPROCESSORS_ONLN),
which is apparently defined under OS X, and returns the number of online CPUs
(logical?):
Yury Selivanov added the comment:
bump?
--
nosy: +yselivanov
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue17444
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing
STINNER Victor added the comment:
I like the idea of a new function in the os module because I don't
like having to import the multiprocessing module just to known the
number of CPUs. I'm using such function to set MAKEFLAGS envrionment
variable on Linux: -j8 par example.
2013/3/19 Trent Nelson
Ronald Oussoren added the comment:
I also like the os.cpu_count() function, the information is useful sometimes
outside of multiprocessing, and calling out to external scripts to gather the
information (as multiprocessing currently does) feels yucky.
That should probably be a new issue, the
John Szakmeister added the comment:
Actually, Trent's version looks at hw.logicalcpu and then falls back to
hw.ncpu, if there was an error. Given the state of the documentation on these
parameters, it's hard to say whether it's right or wrong, but at least
hw.logicalcpu scales correctly if I
Trent Nelson added the comment:
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 01:58:59AM -0700, John Szakmeister wrote:
John Szakmeister added the comment:
Actually, Trent's version looks at hw.logicalcpu and then falls back
to hw.ncpu, if there was an error. Given the state of the
documentation on these
Ronald Oussoren added the comment:
I'm not sure if hw.availcpu is the right value to use as it is not documented
at all (neither in a manpage, nor in a headerfile).
hw.activecpu seems to be the one that should be used: it is documented as The
number of processors currently available for
John Szakmeister added the comment:
Ronald: it is mentioned in some books (a Google search can turn them up), but
they don't really offer much description behind the intent. When I looked into
this several years ago, it was very unclear what `hw.activecpu` was intended
for. It sounded more
STINNER Victor added the comment:
Here is an interesting, but old (2007), email on darwin-dev:
http://lists.apple.com/archives/darwin-dev/2007/Jun/msg00088.html
This can all change in the future, but currently:
hw.ncpu is a wart; consider it to be deprecated.
hw.physicalcpu is the number of
Trent Nelson added the comment:
I remember looking at what multiprocessing did and not really liking it; I
ended up writing a C version that works across a wider range of platforms,
accessible via posixmodule.c:posix_cpu_count() (os.cpu_count()):
New submission from John Szakmeister:
While trying to test a fix for Nose, I discovered that multiprocessing is
picking up the CPU count incorrectly. It should be using hw.availcpu instead
of hw.ncpu. The latter is the number of cpus installed in the system, but the
former is the number
Changes by Richard Oudkerk shibt...@gmail.com:
--
nosy: +sbt
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue17444
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing
Changes by Antoine Pitrou pit...@free.fr:
--
stage: - patch review
versions: +Python 2.7, Python 3.2, Python 3.3, Python 3.4
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue17444
___
Changes by Ned Deily n...@acm.org:
--
nosy: +ned.deily, ronaldoussoren
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue17444
___
___
15 matches
Mail list logo
