Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.python > #26197 > unrolled thread

Is Python a commercial proposition ?

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.python

Contents

  Is Python a commercial proposition ? lipska the kat <lipska@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-07-29 17:01 +0100
    Re: Is Python a commercial proposition ? Michael Hrivnak <mhrivnak@hrivnak.org> - 2012-07-29 13:13 -0400
      Re: Is Python a commercial proposition ? Bernd Waterkamp <Bernd-Waterkamp@web.de> - 2012-07-29 21:43 +0200
      Re: Is Python a commercial proposition ? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2012-07-29 23:47 +0200
    Re: Is Python a commercial proposition ? Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-07-29 18:43 +0100
    counting source lines (was: Is Python a commercial proposition ?) Stefan Behnel <stefan_ml@behnel.de> - 2012-07-29 19:49 +0200
    Re: Is Python a commercial proposition ? Brandon Schaffer <bschaffer13@gmail.com> - 2012-07-29 11:50 -0600
    Re: Is Python a commercial proposition ? Tim Chase <python.list@tim.thechases.com> - 2012-07-29 13:28 -0500
    Re: Is Python a commercial proposition ? Andrew Cooper <amc96@cam.ac.uk> - 2012-07-29 19:34 +0100
    Re: Is Python a commercial proposition ? Stefan Behnel <stefan_ml@behnel.de> - 2012-07-29 20:38 +0200
    Re: Is Python a commercial proposition ? Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2012-07-29 15:38 -0400
    Re: Is Python a commercial proposition ? Aled Evans <aled.r.evans@gmail.com> - 2012-07-29 12:54 -0700
    Re: Is Python a commercial proposition ? Rodrick Brown <rodrick.brown@gmail.com> - 2012-07-29 20:12 -0400
    Re: Is Python a commercial proposition ? Andrew Berg <bahamutzero8825@gmail.com> - 2012-07-29 19:52 -0500
    Re: Is Python a commercial proposition ? Rodrick Brown <rodrick.brown@gmail.com> - 2012-07-29 22:31 -0400
      Re: Is Python a commercial proposition ? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-07-29 20:03 -0700
      Re: Is Python a commercial proposition ? alex23 <wuwei23@gmail.com> - 2012-07-30 17:45 -0700
    Re: Is Python a commercial proposition ? Stefan Behnel <stefan_ml@behnel.de> - 2012-07-30 08:07 +0200
      Re: Is Python a commercial proposition ? Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2012-07-30 14:09 +0000
        Re: Is Python a commercial proposition ? Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2012-07-31 02:06 +0000
          Re: Is Python a commercial proposition ? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2012-07-30 21:45 -0700
            Re: Is Python a commercial proposition ? Stefan Behnel <stefan_ml@behnel.de> - 2012-07-31 07:27 +0200
            Re: Is Python a commercial proposition ? Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2012-07-31 06:29 +0000
              Re: Is Python a commercial proposition ? Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2012-07-31 08:04 -0400
    Re: Is Python a commercial proposition ? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2012-07-30 17:52 +1000
      Re: Is Python a commercial proposition ? Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2012-07-30 09:06 -0400
        Re: Is Python a commercial proposition ? lipska the kat <lipska@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-07-30 14:37 +0100
          Re: Is Python a commercial proposition ? David <bouncingcats@gmail.com> - 2012-07-31 23:52 +1000
            Re: Is Python a commercial proposition ? lipska the kat <lipska@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-07-31 18:27 +0100
              Re: Is Python a commercial proposition ? David <bouncingcats@gmail.com> - 2012-08-01 09:31 +1000
              Re: Is Python a commercial proposition ? Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-08-01 09:06 +0100
                Re: Is Python a commercial proposition ? lipska the kat <lipska@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-08-01 09:15 +0100
                  Re: Is Python a commercial proposition ? David <bouncingcats@gmail.com> - 2012-08-01 21:59 +1000
                  Re: Is Python a commercial proposition ? Stefan Behnel <stefan_ml@behnel.de> - 2012-08-01 14:32 +0200
                  Re: Is Python a commercial proposition ? David <bouncingcats@gmail.com> - 2012-08-02 13:10 +1000
                    Re: Is Python a commercial proposition ? lipska the kat <lipskathekat@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-08-02 09:17 +0100
                  Re: Is Python a commercial proposition ? Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-08-02 09:09 +0100
                  RE: Is Python a commercial proposition ? "Prasad, Ramit" <ramit.prasad@jpmorgan.com> - 2012-08-03 06:51 +0000
                  Re: Is Python a commercial proposition ? Stefan Behnel <stefan_ml@behnel.de> - 2012-08-03 11:34 +0200
    Re: Is Python a commercial proposition ? Tim Chase <python.list@tim.thechases.com> - 2012-07-30 06:09 -0500
    Re: Is Python a commercial proposition ? rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2012-07-30 09:25 -0700
    Re: Is Python a commercial proposition ? Emile van Sebille <emile@fenx.com> - 2012-07-30 10:36 -0700
    RE: Is Python a commercial proposition ? "Prasad, Ramit" <ramit.prasad@jpmorgan.com> - 2012-07-30 18:26 +0000
    Re: Is Python a commercial proposition ? Chris Withers <chris@python.org> - 2012-08-23 22:46 +0100
      Re: Is Python a commercial proposition ? lipska the kat <lipskathekat@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-08-24 12:03 +0100

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

#26291

Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> writes:
> And at that level, you aren't going to write your app in Python anyway, 
> and not because of the GIL. (These microcontrollers are unlikely to have 
> multiple cores -- why the hell does your microwave oven need two cores?)

http://greenarrays.com ;-)

> It seems to me that those who claim that the GIL is a serious barrier to 
> Python's use in the enterprise are mostly cargo-cult programmers, 

I would say, it puts a crimp into Python's versatility but there are
still lots of areas where it's not a serious issue.  A real compiler
(PyPy) will help Python performance far more than multi-core currently
can.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26293

Paul Rubin, 31.07.2012 06:45:
> A real compiler (PyPy) will help Python performance far more than
> multi-core currently can.

That's too general a statement to be meaningful.

Stefan

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26297

On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 21:45:51 -0700, Paul Rubin wrote:

> Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> writes:
>> And at that level, you aren't going to write your app in Python anyway,
>> and not because of the GIL. (These microcontrollers are unlikely to
>> have multiple cores -- why the hell does your microwave oven need two
>> cores?)
> 
> http://greenarrays.com ;-)
> 
>> It seems to me that those who claim that the GIL is a serious barrier
>> to Python's use in the enterprise are mostly cargo-cult programmers,
> 
> I would say, it puts a crimp into Python's versatility but there are
> still lots of areas where it's not a serious issue.

Of course it's a crimp. Nobody likes the GIL for its own sake, and nobody 
likes the fact that it does slow CPython down under some circumstances. 
It's not like the Python devs scheme behind closed doors on how to make 
Python slower. If somebody came up with a way to remove the GIL without 
the harmful side-effects, or volunteered to do the enormous amount of 
work needed, the devs would be as enthusiastic for it as anyone else.

Recognising that there are *some* applications where Python isn't 
suitable (for whatever reason, not just because of the GIL) is simply 
common sense. There are a whole lot of factors leading to the choice of a 
compiler. "Can use all available cores on a CPU" is only one of many.

[rant]
But to hear some people talk, CPU-bound multi-threaded apps are the only 
"serious" enterprise apps, and further more, there is no possible way to 
make a program fast enough *except* threads, hence no possible way that 
Python is suitable except by removing the GIL.

Do they consider that perhaps there are alternatives to threads? Or that 
there already are Python implementations that don't include the GIL, 
running on big enterprise-friendly platforms like Java and .NET? No they 
do not. If Python didn't have the GIL, they'd find some other excuse to 
dismiss it for "serious" work.

And that is why I consider that anyone repeating without nuance the 
canard that the GIL makes Python unsuitable for serious enterprise work 
is a cargo-cultist.
[/rant]

And now I have to go yell at some kids who are on my lawn.



-- 
Steven

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26303

In article <50177b4d$0$29867$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com>,
 Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> wrote:

> Do they consider that perhaps there are alternatives to threads?

There's basically two reasons people use threads.

First is because it's a convenient way to multiplex short-lived tasks on 
a single processor.  What people tend to forget is that we managed to do 
that before there were threads.  Event loops still work perfectly fine.  
For an interesting example, http://www.gevent.org/.

Second is because we have multiple long-lived, compute-bound tasks and 
want to be able to take advantage of multiple processors.  For that, 
multiprocessing works just fine most of the time.  And multiprocess has 
the advantage over multithreading in that the processes can run on 
different machines, so you're not limited by the number of cores you can 
get on a single CPU.

What multiprocessing doesn't give you is fine-grain task switching.  So 
we're left with the set of jobs which consist of many (but not more than 
the number of cores on one CPU) compute-bound tasks, that we know how to 
parallelize, and require fine-grain task switching.  Sure, that's an 
important set of jobs, but there's a whole huge world of computing that 
doesn't fit into that box.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26234

On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 4:07 PM, Stefan Behnel <stefan_ml@behnel.de> wrote:
> Still, you may still get away with the above statement by providing a
> sufficiently narrow definition of "standalone". By my definition, there
> isn't much "standalone" code out there. Most code I know interfaces with a
> couple of external tools, libraries or backends, usually written in
> languages I don't have to care about because they provide a language
> independent interface.

Agreed, and the flip-side of that is that there aren't many
mono-language developers either. Sure, it'd be possible to make a
career of nothing but Objective-C, writing apps for Apple to make all
the money off, but even then you'll probably benefit from knowing some
glue languages.

Python's an excellent glue language, but it's also fine for huge
applications. Yes, it can't multithread across cores if you use
CPython and are CPU-bound. That's actually a pretty specific
limitation, and taking out any component of that eliminates the GIL as
a serious problem.

ChrisA

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26251

In article <mailman.2717.1343634778.4697.python-list@python.org>,
 Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> wrote:

> Python's an excellent glue language, but it's also fine for huge
> applications. Yes, it can't multithread across cores if you use
> CPython and are CPU-bound. That's actually a pretty specific
> limitation, and taking out any component of that eliminates the GIL as
> a serious problem.

These days, I'm working on a fairly large web application (songza.com).  
The business/application logic is written entirely in Python (mostly as 
two django apps).  That's what we spend 80% of our developer time 
writing.

As for scale, we're currently running on 80 cores worth of AWS servers 
for the front end.  Another 50 or so cores for the database and other 
backend functions.  Yesterday (Sunday, so a slow day), we served 27 
million HTTP requests; we're not facebook-sized, but it's not some 
little toy application either.

Every time we look at performance, we can't hardly measure the time it 
takes to run the Python code.  Overall, we spend (way) more time waiting 
on network I/O than anything else.  Other than I/O, our biggest 
performance issue is slow database queries, and making more queries than 
we really need to.

The engineering work to improve performance involves restructuring our 
data representation in the database, caching (at multiple levels), or 
eliminating marginal features which cost more than they're worth.  None 
of this would be any different if we used C++, except that we'd spend so 
much time writing and debugging code that we'd have no time left to 
think about the really important stuff.

As far as the GIL is concerned, it's just not an issue for us.  We run 
lots of server processes.  Perhaps not as elegant as running fewer 
multi-threaded processes, but it works just fine, is easy to implement, 
and we never have to worry about all the horrors of getting memory 
management right in a multi-threaded C++ application.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26253

On 30/07/12 14:06, Roy Smith wrote:
> In article<mailman.2717.1343634778.4697.python-list@python.org>,
>   Chris Angelico<rosuav@gmail.com>  wrote:
>
>> Python's an excellent glue language, but it's also fine for huge
>> applications. Yes, it can't multithread across cores if you use
>> CPython and are CPU-bound. That's actually a pretty specific
>> limitation, and taking out any component of that eliminates the GIL as
>> a serious problem.
>
> These days, I'm working on a fairly large web application (songza.com).
> The business/application logic is written entirely in Python (mostly as
> two django apps).  That's what we spend 80% of our developer time
> writing.
>

snip

"We are very sorry to say that due to licensing constraints we cannot 
allow access to Songza for listeners located outside of the United States."

Arse :-(

Lipska

-- 
Lipska the Kat: Troll hunter, sandbox destroyer
and farscape dreamer of Aeryn Sun

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26309

On 30/07/2012, lipska the kat <lipska@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> On 30/07/12 14:06, Roy Smith wrote:
>>
>> These days, I'm working on a fairly large web application (songza.com).
>
> "We are very sorry to say that due to licensing constraints we cannot
> allow access to Songza for listeners located outside of the United States."
>
> Arse :-(

A free[1] US proxy could bypass[2] that page ... eg something like
http://www.airproxy.ca/

[1] as in beer
[2] for research purposes

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26322

On 31/07/12 14:52, David wrote:
> On 30/07/2012, lipska the kat<lipska@yahoo.co.uk>  wrote:
>> On 30/07/12 14:06, Roy Smith wrote:
>>>
>>> These days, I'm working on a fairly large web application (songza.com).
>>
>> "We are very sorry to say that due to licensing constraints we cannot
>> allow access to Songza for listeners located outside of the United States."
>>
>> Arse :-(
>
> A free[1] US proxy could bypass[2] that page ... eg something like
> http://www.airproxy.ca/
>
> [1] as in beer
> [2] for research purposes

Oooooh that's a bit good isn't it, just for research purposes of course.

There's one (as in 1 above) in the pump for you.

lipska

-- 
Lipska the Kat: Troll hunter, sandbox destroyer
and farscape dreamer of Aeryn Sun

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26330

On 01/08/2012, lipska the kat <lipska@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> On 31/07/12 14:52, David wrote:
>>
>> [1] as in beer
>> [2] for research purposes
>
> There's one (as in 1 above) in the pump for you.

Great, more beer => better research => \o/\o/\o/
But, "pump" sounds a bit extreme .. I usually sip contentedly from a glass :p

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26337

On 01/08/2012 00:31, David wrote:
> On 01/08/2012, lipska the kat <lipska@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 31/07/12 14:52, David wrote:
>>>
>>> [1] as in beer
>>> [2] for research purposes
>>
>> There's one (as in 1 above) in the pump for you.
>
> Great, more beer => better research => \o/\o/\o/
> But, "pump" sounds a bit extreme .. I usually sip contentedly from a glass :p
>

You complete ignoramus, if it gets poured in advance that's no good to 
anybody as it'll go flat.  Has to stay in the pump until you're ready to 
drink it from the glass.  Don't you know anything about the importance 
of process and timing? :)

-- 
Cheers.

Mark Lawrence.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26338

On 01/08/12 09:06, Mark Lawrence wrote:
> On 01/08/2012 00:31, David wrote:
>> On 01/08/2012, lipska the kat <lipska@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>> On 31/07/12 14:52, David wrote:
>>>>
>>>> [1] as in beer
>>>> [2] for research purposes
>>>
>>> There's one (as in 1 above) in the pump for you.
>>
>> Great, more beer => better research => \o/\o/\o/
>> But, "pump" sounds a bit extreme .. I usually sip contentedly from a
>> glass :p
>>
>
> You complete ignoramus, if it gets poured in advance that's no good to
> anybody as it'll go flat. Has to stay in the pump until you're ready to
> drink it from the glass. Don't you know anything about the importance of
> process and timing? :)
>

Heh heh, obviously never got drunk ... er I mean served behind the bar 
at uni/college/pub %-}

lipska

-- 
Lipska the Kat: Troll hunter, sandbox destroyer
and farscape dreamer of Aeryn Sun

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26352

On 01/08/2012, lipska the kat <lipska@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> On 01/08/12 09:06, Mark Lawrence wrote:
>>
>> You complete ignoramus, if it gets poured in advance that's no good to
>> anybody as it'll go flat. Has to stay in the pump until you're ready to
>> drink it from the glass. Don't you know anything about the importance of
>> process and timing? :)
>
> Heh heh, obviously never got drunk ... er I mean served behind the bar
> at uni/college/pub %-}

Nah, obviously *is* drunk ;p

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26354

David, 01.08.2012 13:59:
> On 01/08/2012, lipska the kat wrote:
>> On 01/08/12 09:06, Mark Lawrence wrote:
>>>
>>> You complete ignoramus, if it gets poured in advance that's no good to
>>> anybody as it'll go flat. Has to stay in the pump until you're ready to
>>> drink it from the glass. Don't you know anything about the importance of
>>> process and timing? :)
>>
>> Heh heh, obviously never got drunk ... er I mean served behind the bar
>> at uni/college/pub %-}
> 
> Nah, obviously *is* drunk ;p

Would you mind taking this slightly off-topic discussion off the list?

Thanks.

Stefan

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26380

On 01/08/2012, Stefan Behnel <stefan_ml@behnel.de> wrote:
>
> Would you mind taking this slightly off-topic discussion off the list?

I always strive to stay on-topic. In fact immediately this thread went
off topic, 4 messages back, I did try to go off list, but got this
result from the OP:

Delivery to the following recipient failed permanently:
     lipska@yahoo.co.uk
Technical details of permanent failure:
Google tried to deliver your message, but it was rejected by the
recipient domain. We recommend contacting the other email provider for
further information about the cause of this error. The error that the
other server returned was: 554 554 delivery error: dd This user
doesn't have a yahoo.co.uk account (lipska@yahoo.co.uk) [-5] -
mta1050.mail.ukl.yahoo.com (state 17).
Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2012 09:31:43 +1000
Subject: Re: Is Python a commercial proposition ?
From: David <bouncingcats@gmail.com>
To: lipska the kat <lipska@yahoo.co.uk>

Then, if someone is going to call me an ignoramus on a public list,
they will receive a response in the same forum.

So, I apologise to the list, but please note the unusual circumstances. Thanks.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26383

On 02/08/12 04:10, David wrote:
> On 01/08/2012, Stefan Behnel<stefan_ml@behnel.de>  wrote:
>>
>> Would you mind taking this slightly off-topic discussion off the list?
>
> I always strive to stay on-topic. In fact immediately this thread went
> off topic, 4 messages back, I did try to go off list, but got this
> result from the OP:
>
> Delivery to the following recipient failed permanently:
>       lipska@yahoo.co.uk

snip

This is my fault, I set the reply to address incorrectly. You HAVE 
corresponded successfully with me in the past however... I apologise for 
the inconvenience.

JFTR I did not call you an ignoramus (it's a funny word though isn't it, 
makes me smile anyway).

lipska

-- 
Lipska the Kat: Troll hunter, sandbox destroyer
and farscape dreamer of Aeryn Sun

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26382

On 02/08/2012 04:10, David wrote:
> On 01/08/2012, Stefan Behnel <stefan_ml@behnel.de> wrote:
>>
>> Would you mind taking this slightly off-topic discussion off the list?
>
> I always strive to stay on-topic. In fact immediately this thread went
> off topic, 4 messages back, I did try to go off list, but got this
> result from the OP:
>
> Delivery to the following recipient failed permanently:
>       lipska@yahoo.co.uk
> Technical details of permanent failure:
> Google tried to deliver your message, but it was rejected by the
> recipient domain. We recommend contacting the other email provider for
> further information about the cause of this error. The error that the
> other server returned was: 554 554 delivery error: dd This user
> doesn't have a yahoo.co.uk account (lipska@yahoo.co.uk) [-5] -
> mta1050.mail.ukl.yahoo.com (state 17).
> Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2012 09:31:43 +1000
> Subject: Re: Is Python a commercial proposition ?
> From: David <bouncingcats@gmail.com>
> To: lipska the kat <lipska@yahoo.co.uk>
>
> Then, if someone is going to call me an ignoramus on a public list,
> they will receive a response in the same forum.
>
> So, I apologise to the list, but please note the unusual circumstances. Thanks.
>

I'm in stuck record mode here, but one of the things I really enjoy 
about reading here is the way things do go off topic.  IMHO makes for a 
far more interesting experience.  YMMV.

-- 
Cheers.

Mark Lawrence.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26419

> I'm in stuck record mode here, but one of the things I really enjoy
> about reading here is the way things do go off topic.  IMHO makes for a
> far more interesting experience.  YMMV.

+1 

Ramit
This email is confidential and subject to important disclaimers and
conditions including on offers for the purchase or sale of
securities, accuracy and completeness of information, viruses,
confidentiality, legal privilege, and legal entity disclaimers,
available at http://www.jpmorgan.com/pages/disclosures/email.  

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26422

Prasad, Ramit, 03.08.2012 08:51:
>> I'm in stuck record mode here, but one of the things I really enjoy
>> about reading here is the way things do go off topic.  IMHO makes for a
>> far more interesting experience.  YMMV.
> 
> +1 
> 
> Ramit
> This email is confidential and subject to important disclaimers and
> conditions including on offers for the purchase or sale of
> securities, accuracy and completeness of information, viruses,
> confidentiality, legal privilege, and legal entity disclaimers,
> available at http://www.jpmorgan.com/pages/disclosures/email.  

Huh? Who's still trying to sell viruses these days? I thought they came for
free?

Stefan

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#26243

On 07/29/12 21:31, Rodrick Brown wrote:
> Its still not possible to be a pure Python developer and find
> gainful employment today.

I'm not sure where you get your facts, but unless you define "pure"
in a super-narrow way, it's just flat-out wrong.  I've been employed
doing primarily Python for the past 7+ years.  Yes, there's been
some SQL involved; yes, I've done code-reviews for somebody else's
C# (the nice thing about C-like languages is they all read mostly
the same); yes, some of the web apps have required knowing
ECMAScript, HTML, XML, CSS, etc.  But the day to day is mostly
coding in Python.  And the several recruiters that have contacted me
in the past week or two about additional Python positions seem to
think there are pure Python jobs available.

Maybe you intended to write "not possible to be a poor Python
developer and find gainful employment today" which could surely be
the case, as I've met LOTS of programmers (Python and otherwise)
that I'd never consider hiring because of their poor
skills/understanding of their tools.

-tkc

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.python

csiph-web