[Python-ideas] An alternate approach to async IO
trent at snakebite.org
Wed Nov 28 23:54:43 CET 2012
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 02:28:35PM -0800, Greg Ewing wrote:
> Trent Nelson wrote:
> > I'm arguing that with my approach, because the background
> > IO thread stuff is as optimal as it can be -- more IO events would
> > be available per event loop iteration, and the latency between the
> > event occurring versus when the event loop picks it up would be
> > reduced. The theory being that that will result in higher through-
> > put and lower latency in practice.
> But the data still as to wait around somewhere until the Python
> thread gets around to dealing with it. I don't see why it's
> better for it to sit around in the interlocked list than it is
> for the completion packets to just wait in the IOCP until the
> Python thread is ready.
Hopefully the response I just sent to Guido makes things a little
clearer? I gave a few more examples of where I believe my approach
is going to be much better than the single thread approach, which
overlaps the concerns you raise here.
More information about the Python-ideas