Concurrency models and implementation concerns (was: socket function that loops AND returns something)

[Cameron Laird]

In article <os3b22-3lj.ln1 at lairds.us>, I offered:
>In article <C9j2d.16227$QJ3.9153 at newssvr21.news.prodigy.com>,
>Bryan Olson  <fakeaddress at nowhere.org> wrote:
>			.
>			.
>			.
>> > Do you intend that readers believe that it "is perfectly
>> > reasonable" to design in terms of a single Python process
>> > which manages up to "a thousand simultaneous *Python*
>> > threads"?
>>
>>Yes.
>Thank you for this and your other unambiguous clarifications.
>
>My daily world includes several Win* boxes running on 100-200 MHz
>*86 processors, with memory ranging from 32 Mb up.  Perhaps I 
>should make time during the next month to write and run a few
>benchmarks applicable to my needs; I confess I haven't done so for
>the case of a thousand simultaneous Python threads.  
>			.
>			.
>			.
Do
  http://groups.google.com/groups?th=181172231bcfb4a
and especially
  http://groups.google.com/groups?frame=left&th=4e2e83a9ad69f788
make my hesitation about reliance on kilothreads on older platforms
more understandable?
-- 

Cameron Laird <claird at phaseit.net>
Business:  http://www.Phaseit.net