Parallel(?) programming with python

[subin]

Please let me know if that is okay.

On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 7:46 PM <2QdxY4RzWzUUiLuE at potatochowder.com> wrote:

> On 2022-08-09 at 17:04:51 +0000,
> "Schachner, Joseph (US)" <Joseph.Schachner at Teledyne.com> wrote:
>
> > Why would this application *require* parallel programming?  This could
> > be done in one, single thread program.  Call time to get time and save
> > it as start_time.  Keep a count of the number of 6 hour intervals,
> > initialize it to 0.
>
> In theory, you are correct.
>
> In practice, [stuff] happens.  What if your program crashes?  Or the
> computer crashes?  Or there's a Python update?  Or an OS update?  Where
> does all that pending data go, and how will you recover it after you've
> addressed whatever happened? ¹
>
> OTOH, once you start writing the pending data to a file, then it's an
> extremely simple leap to multiple programs (rather than multiple
> threads) for all kinds of good reasons.
>
> ¹ FWIW, I used to develop highly available systems, such as telephone
> switches, which allow [stuff] to happen, and yet continue to function.
> It's pretty cool to yank a board (yes, physically remove it, without
> warning) from the system without [apparently] disrupting anything.  Such
> systems also allow for hardware, OS, and application upgrades, too
> (IIRC, we were allowed a handful of seconds of downtime per year to meet
> our availability requirements).  That said, designing and building such
> a system for the sakes of simplicity and convenience of the application
> we're talking about here would make a pretty good definition of
> "overkill."
> --
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
>