[Python-Dev] Fixing the GIL (with a BFS scheduler) (original) (raw)
David Beazley dave at dabeaz.com
Wed May 19 22:49:02 CEST 2010
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] Fixing the GIL (with a BFS scheduler)
- Next message: [Python-Dev] Fixing the GIL (with a BFS scheduler)
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Yes, but the million dollar question is whether or not it really is superior with the I/O convoying problem in the current implementation (an effect that is substantially worse with the new GIL than with the old one by the way). Personally, I think the convoying issue is something that will have to be fixed eventually. Although, I also agree that it merits more study--especially with real-world applications.
Cheers, Dave
On May 19, 2010, at 3:34 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
Peter Portante wrote:
Does anybody think that by having problems with the new GIL that it might further weaken the adoption rate for 3k? -peter No, to the contrary. By having the new GIL being superior to the old implementation, the adoption rate for 3k will increase. Regards, Martin
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] Fixing the GIL (with a BFS scheduler)
- Next message: [Python-Dev] Fixing the GIL (with a BFS scheduler)
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]