ZODB, Databases, and Threads

Aahz Maruch aahz at panix.com
Wed Apr 11 16:19:37 EDT 2001


In article <3ad3da60_2 at goliath2.newsfeeds.com>,
Ixokai <noone at nowhere.org> wrote:
>
>    I'm working on a project using Stackless Python so that I can have quite
>a few threads of execution running at the same time without the overhead of
>creating and destroying them, since the above will all be done possibly
>frequently.
>
>    I was origionally going to use ZODB, but after doing some looking into,
>it seems as though it might not be appropriate. You see, in my application,
>it is ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL that every thread access the SAME data at any one
>moment in time; none of this transaction bit. I was going to do a 'many
>readers, one writer' bit with a lock to make it so only one thread can
>write, but it sounded like Zope with its get_transaction() bit was actually
>geared to make this difficult.

Maybe I'm missing something, but one of the features of microthreads is
that you in fact have zero concurrency, despite the illusion.  If you
have one single writer thread with some appropriate control structures,
you should have no problems.
-- 
                      --- Aahz  <*>  (Copyright 2001 by aahz at pobox.com)

Androgynous poly kinky vanilla queer het Pythonista   http://www.rahul.net/aahz/
Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6

Why is this newsgroup different from all other newsgroups?



More information about the Python-list mailing list