"Carl J. Van Arsdall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 8<----------------------------------------------------------------
| point). Its not only important that the threads die, but that they die | with grace. There's lots of cleanup work that has to be done when | things exit or things end up in an indeterminable state. | | So, I feel like I have a couple options, | | 1) try moving everything to a process oriented configuration - we think | this would be bad, from a resource standpoint as well as it would make | things more difficult to move to a fully distributed system later, when | I get my army of code monkeys. | | 2) Suck it up and go straight for the distributed system now - managers | don't like this, but maybe its easier than I think its going to be, I dunno | | 3) See if we can find some other way of getting the threads to terminate. | | 4) Kill it and clean it up by hand or helper scripts - we don't want to | do this either, its one of the major things we're trying to get away from. 8<----------------------------------------------------------------------------- This may be a stupid suggestion - If I understand what you are doing, its essentially running a bunch of compilers with different options on various machines around the place - so there is a fifth option - namely to do nothing - let them finish and just throw the output away - i.e. just automate the cleanup... - Hendrik -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
