[Pythonmac-SIG] Pystone numbers for different Macs...
Daniel Lord
daniellord at mac.com
Wed Jan 23 01:27:35 CET 2008
Kent,
Thanks for the link. I am just lazy (that's why I like Python over C/
CPP/ObjC when I can get away with it) and would prefer the lightweight
(to design and code that is not as in process overhead) threads over
separate application processes. But certainly you get more flexibility
and power for the increased effort. TANSTAAFL. I'll give it a shot and
see what it can do. Maybe spawning a number python interpreters (one
for each processor core) and see what the cumulative pystone is though
it would be an Apples to Oranges comparison...oh wait... <insert
clever Apple pun here> ;-)
On Jan 21, 2008, at 5:33 AM, Kent Johnson wrote:
> Daniel Lord wrote:
>> My point was that, as I understand it, thanks to the GIL--Python
>> cannot easily take advantage of multi-cores period even when the
>> program uses multiple threads--it it is a limitation of the
>> implementation of the language interpreter. I guess that tells us
>> we ought to write multi-core code in C/C++/ObjC instead. Either
>> that or Python's implementation needs to embrace threading more
>> expansively.
>
> Or don't use threading for multiprocessing. Current best practice
> seems to be to use a multiprocessing model to distribute Python
> programs. There are quite a few add-on packages which support this:
> http://wiki.python.org/moin/ParallelProcessing
>
> Kent
More information about the Pythonmac-SIG
mailing list