Running Python on SMP machine

[William Park]

On Tue, Oct 10, 2000 at 02:22:31AM +0300, Erno Kuusela wrote:
> >>>>> "Aahz" == Aahz Maruch <aahz at panix.com> writes:
> 
>  | That's the Global Interpreter Lock.  But my experience is that
>  | frequently the overhead of synchronizing between two separate processes
>  | overwhelms the payback you get from actual use of SMP -- that trick works
>  | best if the two processes do no synchronization.
> 
> yes. that is true regardless of what ipc model (threads/locks or
> message passing) you use.  some tasks are inherently not
> parallelizable, while some tasks are.
> 
> this is, however, not a good reason to use python threads
> for smp if your particular task is parallelizable. quite
> the opposite.

Hi Erno,  can you elaborate on this?

My program is not particularly I/O intensive -- just slurping single
table at the beginning, and writing a smaller table at the end.  But,
within my program, there are a lot of sections where calculations are
inherently independent.  Eg.
    c = a+b	<- section 1, independent of section 2
    d = a-b	<- section 2, independent of section 1
    e = c/d	<- using result of the two sections.


---William Park, Open Geometry Consulting