Matthew T. Kromer wrote:
> Myroslav Opyr wrote:
>> For FreeBSD there is another pthreads related bug in Python. And
>> quick-patch from
>> with THREAD_STACK_SIZE=0x20000 solves the problem. But it is quick
>> and dirty hack. Will it be solved in next bugfix release of Python?
>> Whom/where I have to contact to have progress regarding the issue?
>> I'll post comment into SF tracker because site which crashed
>> previously works fine now (for 5 days already)... Is that sufficient?
>> This dirty patch is not acceptable and clean solution have to take
>> place. Should I take part and try to develop one?
> Well, the way you start threading with pthreads requres a single
> initializer for the stack size; once you have initialized the
> threading environment you cannot change the stacksize later, to the
> best of my knowledge.
Ok. What general solution should be? One of the possible ways would be
to reserve big stack enough for all cases but only small portion of it
(generally used by apps) turn into phisical memory. It should be default
behavior for majority of OSes/Libs, shouldn't it?
> I suppose you could finesse a new python startup argument, or
> environment variable check.
+1 for startup argument
-1 for environment
> I think the SF tracker is the best way to approach that.
You mean discussion about the issue shoud take place in tracker?
zope.net.ua <http://zope.net.ua/> ° Ukrainian Zope Hosting
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
cell: +380 50.3174578
Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -