Omer Katz <omer.d...@gmail.com> added the comment:
I think that we should focus our efforts on removing the GIL, now that we have a feasible solution for doing so without breaking anything (hopefully) however the removal of the GIL is still far from being complete and will need to be rebased upon the latest Python version to be merged. This issue would probably hurt Celery since some users use it with a thread pool and it uses a few threads itself but it seems like fixing it is too much effort so if we were to invest a lot of effort, I'd focus on removing the problem entirely. Instead, I suggest we document this with a warning in the relevant place so that people would know to avoid or workaround the problem entirely. On Mon, Mar 21, 2022, 20:32 Guido van Rossum <rep...@bugs.python.org> wrote: > > Change by Guido van Rossum <gu...@python.org>: > > > ---------- > nosy: +gvanrossum > > _______________________________________ > Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> > <https://bugs.python.org/issue7946> > _______________________________________ > ---------- _______________________________________ 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
