Dima Tisnek <dim...@gmail.com> added the comment: My 2c as Python user:
Back in 2010, I've used multithreading extensively, both for concurrency and performance. Others used multiprocessing or just shelled out. People talked about using **the other** core, or sometimes the other socket on a server. Now in 2020, I'm using asyncio exclusively. Some colleagues occasionally still shell out 🙈. None talking about using all cores on a single machine, rather, we'd spin up dozens of identical containers, which are randomly distributed across N machines, and the synchronisation is offloaded to some database (e.g. atomic ops in redis; transactions in sql). In my imagination, I see future Python as single-threaded (from user's point of view, that is without multithreading api), that features speculative out-of-order async task execution (using hardware threads, maybe pinned) that's invisible to the user. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue7946> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
