Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.python > #88402
| References | <mailman.374.1427813384.10327.python-list@python.org> <mfeqm7$r6e$1@dont-email.me> <mailman.385.1427829474.10327.python-list@python.org> <mfeu9p$c6l$1@dont-email.me> |
|---|---|
| From | Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> |
| Date | 2015-03-31 14:12 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: Lockfile hanling |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.python |
| Message-ID | <mailman.386.1427832810.10327.python-list@python.org> (permalink) |
On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 1:59 PM, Christian Gollwitzer <auriocus@gmx.de> wrote: > Am 31.03.15 um 21:17 schrieb Ian Kelly: >> flock locks are per-process; they won't help for synchronizing access >> between competing threads in the same process. >> > > Ok. But if it is really all in one process, then a classical mutex would do, > wouldn't it? I'm not experienced with threading in Python, but it seems from > the documentation, that threading.Lock() works like a mutex. As long as there's not *also* some other external process that needs to access the file occasionally. :-)
Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Lockfile hanling Ervin Hegedüs <airween@gmail.com> - 2015-03-31 16:50 +0200
Re: Lockfile hanling Christian Gollwitzer <auriocus@gmx.de> - 2015-03-31 20:58 +0200
Re: Lockfile hanling Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2015-03-31 13:17 -0600
Re: Lockfile hanling Christian Gollwitzer <auriocus@gmx.de> - 2015-03-31 21:59 +0200
Re: Lockfile hanling Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2015-03-31 14:12 -0600
Re: Lockfile hanling Sturla Molden <sturla.molden@gmail.com> - 2015-04-01 23:51 +0000
csiph-web