Hi, Am Samstag, den 10.03.2007, 07:36 +0100 schrieb Dieter Maurer: > Christian Theune wrote at 2007-3-7 22:05 +0100: > > ... > >If 5 seconds are spend in the application thread to untangle mime data > >which has nothing application-specific about it and then only 100ms or > >so in the application itself, I'd say there is a major overhead problem. > > But if the IO thread spends 5 seconds, then Zope will be unresponsive > for 5 seconds -- for me (and hopefully others, too) a far more > critical situation than a (single) worker spending 5 seconds... > > The IO (ZServer) thread should only perform minimal work in its > "asyncore" callbacks -- each callback should return within > a few milliseconds. > > > My argument does not argue against different threads between > the IO thread and the worker threads, just against giving > the IO thread significant work (whether or not you consider it > application specific).
Ah. Maybe I didn't point this out enough. I was thinking about switching to a "chunk-based" approach on processing the request. That way I want to avoid having to process large file data twice. IMHO a variation of the FieldStorage could be implemented that processes the data line by line as it comes in. That would avoid the 5 sec. delay if you process it at once and should not be a problem in the IO thread. Christian -- gocept gmbh & co. kg - forsterstraße 29 - 06112 halle/saale - germany www.gocept.com - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - phone +49 345 122 9889 7 - fax +49 345 122 9889 1 - zope and plone consulting and development
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
_______________________________________________ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )