On 03/02/2012 01:35 PM, Joshua Harlow wrote:
Does anyone else feel that the following seems really “dirty”, or is it
just me.
“adding a few sleep(0) calls in various places in the
Nova codebase (as was recently added in the _sync_power_states()
periodic task) is an easy and simple win with pretty much no ill
side-effects. :)”
Dirty in that it feels like there is something wrong from a design point
of view.
Sprinkling “sleep(0)” seems like its a band-aid on a larger problem imho.
But that’s just my gut feeling.
It's not really all that dirty, IMHO. You just have to think of
greenlet.sleep(0) as manually yielding control back to eventlet...
Like Phil said, in the absence of a non-userspace threading model and
thread scheduler, there's not a whole lot else one can do other than be
mindful of what functions/methods may run for long periods of time
and/or block I/O and call sleep(0) in those scenarios where it makes
sense to yield a timeslice back to other processes.
While it's true that eventlet (and to an extent Twisted) mask some of
the complexities involved in non-blocking I/O in a threaded(-like)
application programming model, I don't think there will be an
eventlet-that-knows-what-methods-should-yield-and-which-should-be-prioritized
library any time soon.
-jay
_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
