Re: Idea for removing the GIL...

Path	csiph.com!eeepc.pasdenom.info!news.pasdenom.info!news.dougwise.org!aioe.org!news.stack.nl!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed5.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail
Return-Path	<python-python-list@m.gmane.org>
X-Original-To	python-list@python.org
Delivered-To	python-list@mail.python.org
X-Spam-Status	OK 0.000
X-Spam-Evidence	'H': 1.00; 'S': 0.00; 'emulate': 0.07; "he's": 0.07; 'identical': 0.07; 'received:80.91': 0.09; 'received:80.91.229': 0.09; 'received:80.91.229.12': 0.09; 'received:gmane.org': 0.09; 'received:list': 0.09; 'received:lo.gmane.org': 0.09; 'semantics': 0.09; 'subject:removing': 0.09; 'that).': 0.09; 'url:faq': 0.09; 'scripts': 0.09; 'server,': 0.12; 'wrote:': 0.14; 'linux': 0.14; 'creation.': 0.16; 'cygwin': 0.16; 'cygwin,': 0.16; 'kern': 0.16; 'make).': 0.16; 'scenarios': 0.16; 'subject:Idea': 0.16; 'memory': 0.18; 'saying': 0.22; 'stefan': 0.23; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.23; 'perl': 0.24; 'code': 0.25; "isn't": 0.26; 'windows': 0.28; 'project': 0.29; 'received:84': 0.30; 'to:addr:python-list': 0.31; 'considering': 0.31; 'intensive': 0.31; 'header:X-Complaints- To:1': 0.32; 'hours.': 0.32; 'mention': 0.33; 'windows.': 0.33; 'does': 0.33; 'minutes.': 0.34; 'windows,': 0.34; 'pass': 0.34; 'header:User-Agent:1': 0.34; 'received:org': 0.35; 'shell': 0.36; 'used': 0.36; 'less': 0.37; 'data': 0.38; 'entirely': 0.39; 'subject:: ': 0.39; 'header:Mime-Version:1': 0.39; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.40; 'could': 0.40; 'full': 0.61; 'due': 0.69; 'took': 0.69; 'heavy': 0.71; 'here.': 0.71; 'gig': 0.84; 'lifting': 0.91; 'url:api': 0.93
X-Injected-Via-Gmane	http://gmane.org/
To	python-list@python.org
From	Stefan Behnel <stefan_ml@behnel.de>
Subject	Re: Idea for removing the GIL...
Date	Tue, 08 Feb 2011 18:05:33 +0100
References	<7d3a67ba-b5ff-4b11-95b5-71f041dfc63a@o7g2000prn.googlegroups.com> <mailman.0.1297159531.1633.python-list@python.org> <b88fdfc0-0aa1-4710-9b82-30afff9f8a01@a28g2000prb.googlegroups.com> <AANLkTi=i1Zm-MC2isn+hpn6WGy0MSsV7=5LzKnQ8_xVC@mail.gmail.com> <mailman.13.1297183120.1633.python-list@python.org> <roy-65096A.11523608022011@news.panix.com>
Mime-Version	1.0
Content-Type	text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding	7bit
X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host	dslb-084-056-035-247.pools.arcor-ip.net
User-Agent	Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101208 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.7
In-Reply-To	<roy-65096A.11523608022011@news.panix.com>
X-BeenThere	python-list@python.org
X-Mailman-Version	2.1.12
Precedence	list
List-Id	General discussion list for the Python programming language <python-list.python.org>
List-Unsubscribe	<http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-list>, <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive	<http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list>
List-Post	<mailto:python-list@python.org>
List-Help	<mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe	<http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list>, <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=subscribe>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.python
Message-ID	<mailman.17.1297185009.1633.python-list@python.org> (permalink)
Lines	25
NNTP-Posting-Host	82.94.164.166
X-Trace	1297185009 news.xs4all.nl 81483 [::ffff:82.94.164.166]:50978
X-Complaints-To	abuse@xs4all.nl
Xref	csiph.com comp.lang.python:55718

Show key headers only | View raw

Roy Smith, 08.02.2011 17:52:
> Robert Kern wrote:
>
>> Unlike a UNIX fork, CreateProcess() does not have the same copy-on-write
>> semantics for initializing the memory of the new process. If you want to pass
>> data to the children, the data must be pickled and sent across the process
>> boundary. He's not saying that multiprocessing isn't useful at all on
>> Windows, just less useful for the scenarios he is considering here.
>
> Amen, brother!  I used to work on a project that had a build system
> which was very fork() intensive (lots of little perl and shell scripts
> driven by make).  A full system build on a linux box took 30-60 minutes.
> Building the same code on windows/cygwin took about 12 hours.  Identical
> hardware (8-core, 16 gig Dell server, or something like that).
>
> As far as we could tell, it was entirely due to how bad Windows was at
> process creation.

Unlikely. Since you mention cygwin, it was likely due to the heavy lifting 
cygwin does in order to emulate fork() on Windows.

http://www.cygwin.com/faq/faq-nochunks.html#faq.api.fork

Stefan

Thread

Re: Idea for removing the GIL... Adam Tauno Williams <awilliam@whitemice.org> - 2011-02-08 05:05 -0500
  Re: Idea for removing the GIL... Vishal <vsapre80@gmail.com> - 2011-02-08 04:34 -0800
    Re: Idea for removing the GIL... Stefan Behnel <stefan_ml@behnel.de> - 2011-02-08 18:05 +0100
    Re: Idea for removing the GIL... Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2011-02-08 11:52 -0500
    Re: Idea for removing the GIL... Jean-Paul Calderone <calderone.jeanpaul@gmail.com> - 2011-02-08 04:53 -0800

csiph-web