2.6, 3.0, and truly independent intepreters

Michael Sparks ms at cerenity.org
Tue Oct 28 11:30:54 CET 2008


Philip Semanchuk wrote:
> On Oct 25, 2008, at 7:53 AM, Michael Sparks wrote:
>> Glenn Linderman wrote:
>>> In the module multiprocessing environment could you not use shared
>>> memory, then, for the large shared data items?
>>
>> If the poshmodule had a bit of TLC, it would be extremely useful for
>> this,... http://poshmodule.sourceforge.net/
> 
> Last time I checked that was Windows-only. Has that changed?

I've only tested it under Linux where it worked, but does clearly need a bit
of work :)

> The only IPC modules for Unix that I'm aware of are one which I
> adopted (for System V semaphores & shared memory) and one which I
> wrote (for POSIX semaphores & shared memory).
> 
> http://NikitaTheSpider.com/python/shm/
> http://semanchuk.com/philip/posix_ipc/

I'll take a look at those - poshmodule does need a bit of TLC and doesn't
appear to be maintained.

> If anyone wants to wrap POSH cleverness around them, go for it! If
> not, maybe I'll make the time someday.

I personally don't have the time do do this, but I'd be very interested in
hearing someone building an up-to-date version. (Indeed, something like
this would be extremely useful for everyone to have in the standard library
now that the multiprocessing library is in the standard library)


Michael.
--
http://www.kamaelia.org/Home




More information about the Python-list mailing list