On Thu, 02 Jun 2005 12:14:32 -0700, "Hughes, Chad O"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Actually, the bottleneck is not the CPU. Using Perfmon, I have verified
>that I can currently have 1000 threads running with under 25% CPU usage.
>The threads are fairly light weight. However, the stack size for eac
Actually, the bottleneck is not the CPU. Using Perfmon, I have verified
that I can currently have 1000 threads running with under 25% CPU usage.
The threads are fairly light weight. However, the stack size for each
thread is by default 1MB, so the memory is the bottleneck. I want to
have about 10
> I have a program that needs to create a great deal of
> threads. Unfortunately, I cannot seem to find a way to lower
> the 1MB default stack size per thread. The threading module
> does not seem to support setting the stack size explicitly.
> I have 1GB of memory on my system so I can only
win32process.beginthreadex allows you to specify the size. However there is
almost certainly a better way of doing what you want than creating that many
threads, generally using non-blocking operations and an IO Completion Port
- what exactly are you doing?
I believe the "stackless" prject is al
