[Python-Dev] GIL removal question

[Xavier Morel]

On 2011-08-12, at 20:59 , Sturla Molden wrote:

> Den 12.08.2011 18:51, skrev Xavier Morel:
>> * Erlang uses "erlang processes", which are very cheap preempted *processes* (no shared memory). There have always been tens to thousands to millions of erlang processes per interpreter source contention within the interpreter going back to pre-SMP by setting the number of schedulers per node to 1 can yield increased overall performances) 
> 
> Technically, one can make threads behave like processes if they don't share memory pages (though they will still share address space). Erlangs use of 'process' instead of 'thread' does not mean an Erlang process has to be implemented as an OS process.
Of course not. I did not write anything implying that.

> With one interpreter per thread, and a malloc that does not let threads share memory pages (one heap per thread), Python could do the same.
Again, my point is that Erlang does not work "with one interpreter per thread". Which was your claim.