Re: The reliability of python threads

Carl J. Van Arsdall wrote: > Steve Holden wrote: >> [snip] >> >> Are you using memory with built-in error detection and correction? >> >> > You mean in the hardware? I'm not really sure, I'd assume so but is > there any way I can check on this? If the hardware isn't doing that, is > there an

Re: The reliability of python threads

John Nagle wrote: > Aahz wrote: > >> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, >> Carl J. Van Arsdall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> My point is that an app that dies only once every few months under load >> is actually pretty damn stable! That is not the kind of problem that >> you are likely to stimulat

Re: The reliability of python threads

Steve Holden wrote: > [snip] > > Are you using memory with built-in error detection and correction? > > You mean in the hardware? I'm not really sure, I'd assume so but is there any way I can check on this? If the hardware isn't doing that, is there anything I can do with my software to offe

Re: The reliability of python threads

Aahz wrote: > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > Carl J. Van Arsdall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > My point is that an app that dies only once every few months under load > is actually pretty damn stable! That is not the kind of problem that > you are likely to stimulate. This has all been so

Re: The reliability of python threads

Carl J. Van Arsdall wrote: > Aahz wrote: >> [snip] >> >> My response is that you're asking the wrong questions here. Our database >> server locked up hard Sunday morning, and we still have no idea why (the >> machine itself, not just the database app). I think it's more important >> to focus on w

Re: The reliability of python threads

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Carl J. Van Arsdall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Aahz wrote: >> >> My response is that you're asking the wrong questions here. Our database >> server locked up hard Sunday morning, and we still have no idea why (the >> machine itself, not just the database app). I t

Re: The reliability of python threads

Hendrik van Rooyen wrote: > [snip] >> could definitely do more of them. The thing will be >> > > When I read this - I thought - probably your stuff is working > perfectly - on your test cases - you could try to send it some > random data and to see what happens - seeing as you have a test

Re: The reliability of python threads

"Carl J. Van Arsdall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hendrik van Rooyen wrote: > > "Carl J. Van Arsdall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 8< --- > > > Yea, I do some of that too. I use that with conditional print > statements to stderr when i'm doing

Re: The reliability of python threads

Hendrik van Rooyen wrote: > "Carl J. Van Arsdall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> [snip] >> > > Are you 100% rock bottom gold plated guaranteed sure that there is > not something else that is also critical that you just haven't realised is? > 100%? No, definitely not. I know myself,

Re: The reliability of python threads

On 26 Jan, 09:05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nick Maclaren) wrote: > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:|> > |> What makes you think Paddy indicated he wouldn't try to solve the problem? > |> Here's what he wrote: > |> > |> What I'm proposing is that if, for example, a process st

Re: The reliability of python threads

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: |> |> What makes you think Paddy indicated he wouldn't try to solve the problem? |> Here's what he wrote: |> |> What I'm proposing is that if, for example, a process stops running |> three times in a year at roughly three to four

Re: The reliability of python threads

"Carl J. Van Arsdall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Right, I wasn't coming here to get someone to debug my app, I'm just > looking for ideas. I constantly am trying to find new ways to improve > my software and new ways to reduce bugs, and when i get really stuck, > new ways to track bugs down

Re: The reliability of python threads

[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > What makes you think Paddy indicated he wouldn't try to solve the problem? > Here's what he wrote: > > What I'm proposing is that if, for example, a process stops running > three times in a year at roughly three to four months intervals , and it > should hav

Re: The reliability of python threads

Paul> I dunno about Nick, I'm saying it's best to assume that it's Paul> Poisson and do whatever is necessary to diagnose and fix the bug, Paul> and that the voodoo measure you're proposing is not all that Paul> likely to help and it will take years to find out whether it helps

Re: The reliability of python threads

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Paddy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: |> |> No, you should think of the service that needs to be up. You seem to be |> talking about how it can't be fixed rather than looking for ways to |> keep things going. A little learning is fine but "it can't |> theoretically b

Re: The reliability of python threads

"Paddy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > But you're proposing cargo cult programming. > i don't know that term. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargo_cult_programming > What I'm proposing is that if, for example, a process stops running > three times in a year at roughly three to four months interval

Re: The reliability of python threads

On Jan 25, 8:00 pm, Paul Rubin wrote: > "Paddy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > No, you should think of the service that needs to be up. You seem to be > > talking about how it can't be fixed rather than looking for ways to > > keep things going. > But you're proposing

Re: The reliability of python threads

"Paddy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > No, you should think of the service that needs to be up. You seem to be > talking about how it can't be fixed rather than looking for ways to > keep things going. But you're proposing cargo cult programming. There is no reason whatsoever to expect that restar

Re: The reliability of python threads

On Jan 25, 7:36 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nick Maclaren) wrote: > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,"Paddy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:|> > |> > |> Three to four months before `strange errors`? I'd spend some time > |> > |> correlating logs; not just for your program, but for everything > running > |>

Re: The reliability of python threads

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Paddy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: |> |> > |> Three to four months before `strange errors`? I'd spend some time |> > |> correlating logs; not just for your program, but for everything running |> > |> on the server. Then I'd expect to cut my losses and arrange to s

Re: The reliability of python threads

Aahz wrote: > [snip] > > My response is that you're asking the wrong questions here. Our database > server locked up hard Sunday morning, and we still have no idea why (the > machine itself, not just the database app). I think it's more important > to focus on whether you have done all that is re

Re: The reliability of python threads

On Jan 25, 9:26 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nick Maclaren) wrote: > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,"Paddy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:|> > |> Three to four months before `strange errors`? I'd spend some time > |> correlating logs; not just for your program, but for everything running > |> on the serve

Re: The reliability of python threads

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Paddy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: |> |> Three to four months before `strange errors`? I'd spend some time |> correlating logs; not just for your program, but for everything running |> on the server. Then I'd expect to cut my losses and arrange to safely |> re-sta

Re: The reliability of python threads

On Jan 24, 5:18 pm, Paul Rubin wrote: > "Klaas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > CPython is more that "a particular implementation" of python, > It's precisely a particular implementation of Python. Other > implementations include Jython, PyPy, and IronPython. I did not

Re: The reliability of python threads

>> and the GIL is more than an "artifact". It is a central tenet of >> threaded python programming. > > If it's a central tenet of threaded python programming, why is it not > mentioned at all in the language or library manual? The threading > module documentation describes the right way to han

Re: The reliability of python threads

"Klaas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > CPython is more that "a particular implementation" of python, It's precisely a particular implementation of Python. Other implementations include Jython, PyPy, and IronPython. > and the GIL is more than an "artifact". It is a central tenet of > threaded py

Re: The reliability of python threads

On Jan 24, 4:11 pm, Paul Rubin wrote: > "Klaas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > POSIX issues aside, Python's threading model should be less susceptible > > to memory-barrier problems that are possible in other languages (this > > is due to the GIL). > But the GIL is not

Re: The reliability of python threads

"Klaas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > POSIX issues aside, Python's threading model should be less susceptible > to memory-barrier problems that are possible in other languages (this > is due to the GIL). But the GIL is not part of Python's threading model; it's just a particular implementation ar

Re: The reliability of python threads

On Jan 24, 10:43 am, "Carl J. Van Arsdall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Yea, typically I would think that. The problem I am seeing is > incredibly intermittent. Like a simple pyro server that gives me a > problem maybe every three or four months. Just something funky will > happen to the state

Re: The reliability of python threads

On Jan 24, 10:43 am, "Carl J. Van Arsdall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Chris Mellon wrote: > > On 24 Jan 2007 18:21:38 GMT, Nick Maclaren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> [snip] > > > I'm aware of the issues with the POSIX threading model. I still stand > > by my statement - bringing up the pro

Re: The reliability of python threads

On Jan 24, 10:43 am, "Carl J. Van Arsdall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Chris Mellon wrote: > > On 24 Jan 2007 18:21:38 GMT, Nick Maclaren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> [snip] > > > I'm aware of the issues with the POSIX threading model. I still stand > > by my statement - bringing up the pro

Re: The reliability of python threads

Carl J. Van Arsdall wrote: > Chris Mellon wrote: > >> On 24 Jan 2007 18:21:38 GMT, Nick Maclaren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> >>> [snip] >>> >>> >> >> >> I'm aware of the issues with the POSIX threading model. I still stand >> by my statement - bringing up the problems with the provabil

Re: The reliability of python threads

On Jan 24, 6:43 pm, "Carl J. Van Arsdall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Chris Mellon wrote: > > On 24 Jan 2007 18:21:38 GMT, Nick Maclaren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> [snip] > > > I'm aware of the issues with the POSIX threading model. I still stand > > by my statement - bringing up the prob

Re: The reliability of python threads

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Aahz) writes: |> |> My response is that you're asking the wrong questions here. Our database |> server locked up hard Sunday morning, and we still have no idea why (the |> machine itself, not just the database app). I think it's more important

Re: The reliability of python threads

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Carl J. Van Arsdall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >Hey everyone, I have a question about python threads. Before anyone >goes further, this is not a debate about threads vs. processes, just a >question. > >With that, are python threads reliable? Or rather, are they

Re: The reliability of python threads

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Carl J. Van Arsdall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: |> Chris Mellon wrote: |> > |> > Logic and programming errors in user code are far more likely to be |> > the cause of random errors in a threaded program than theoretical |> > (I've never come across a case in pract

Re: The reliability of python threads

Chris Mellon wrote: > On 24 Jan 2007 18:21:38 GMT, Nick Maclaren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> [snip] >> >> > > I'm aware of the issues with the POSIX threading model. I still stand > by my statement - bringing up the problems with the provability of > correctness in the POSIX model amoun

Re: The reliability of python threads

On 24 Jan 2007 18:21:38 GMT, Nick Maclaren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > "Chris Mellon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > |> > |> > |> > |> Does anyone have any conclusive evidence that python threads/locks are > |> > |> safe or unsafe? > |> > > |> > Unsafe. They are

Re: The reliability of python threads

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Chris Mellon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: |> > |> |> > |> Does anyone have any conclusive evidence that python threads/locks are |> > |> safe or unsafe? |> > |> > Unsafe. They are built on top of unsafe primitives (POSIX, Microsoft |> > etc.) Python will shield y

Re: The reliability of python threads

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Carl> Does anyone have any conclusive evidence that python threads/locks > Carl> are safe or unsafe? > > In my experience Python threads are generally safer than the programmers > that use them. ;-) > Haha, yea, tell me about it. The whole GIL thing made me ne

Re: The reliability of python threads

Carl> Does anyone have any conclusive evidence that python threads/locks Carl> are safe or unsafe? In my experience Python threads are generally safer than the programmers that use them. ;-) Skip -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: The reliability of python threads

On 24 Jan 2007 17:12:19 GMT, Nick Maclaren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > "Carl J. Van Arsdall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > |> Hey everyone, I have a question about python threads. Before anyone > |> goes further, this is not a debate about threads vs. processes

Re: The reliability of python threads

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Carl J. Van Arsdall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: |> Hey everyone, I have a question about python threads. Before anyone |> goes further, this is not a debate about threads vs. processes, just a |> question. |> |> With that, are python threads reliable? Or rath

The reliability of python threads

Hey everyone, I have a question about python threads. Before anyone goes further, this is not a debate about threads vs. processes, just a question. With that, are python threads reliable? Or rather, are they safe? I've had some strange errors in the past, I use threading.lock for my critic