On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 3:46 AM, <glyph@divmod.com> wrote:
On 11:11 am, coder_gus@lavabit.com wrote:
So, my question is: is this kind of architecture good to implement? (asynchronous server and threaded workers)
You might want to consider using process workers instead of thread workers, using spawnProcess and a simple control protocol. This is easier to debug, since threads are painful to figure out, and it also scales better - you escape python's GIL and can take advantage of multiple cores, but even if it weren't for that, you can switch spawnProcess to some kind of remote connection API and run your processes remotely.
Would you say that this method of using a separate process instead of threads to do work also is possibly good for database operations? I'm always reading 'beware of threads' ;) with respect to Twisted, so using a very simple control protocol to manage a separate dedicate database process might be better than relying on the threading that 'adbapi' uses? Any comments on this would be appreciated. Thanks, -Alex
_______________________________________________ Twisted-Python mailing list Twisted-Python@twistedmatrix.com http://twistedmatrix.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/twisted-python