threads and sleep?

Jonathan Ellis jbellis at gmail.com
Wed Jul 6 21:27:41 CEST 2005


Peter Hansen wrote:
> Jonathan Ellis wrote:
> > Peter Hansen wrote:
> >>Or investigate the use of Irmen's Pyro package and how it could let you
> >>almost transparently move your code to a *multi-process* architecture
> >
> > Unless you're doing anything that would require distributed locking.
> > Many if not most such projects do, which is why almost everyone prefers
> > to use threads on an SMP machine instead of splitting it across
> > multiple smaller boxes.
>
> I can't address the issue of whether or not "most" such projects require
> distributed locking, because I'm not familiar with more than half of
> such projects, as you appear to be. <wink>

Your sarcasm is cute, I suppose, but think about it for a minute.  If
the opposite of what I assert is true, why would even the mainstream
press be running articles along the lines of "multicore CPUs mean
programming will get tougher because locking is hard to get right and
you can't just scale by relying on the cpu to run your one
thread/process really fast anymore."

http://www.gotw.ca/publications/concurrency-ddj.htm for one example.

-Jonathan




More information about the Python-list mailing list