Laurent Pointal wrote: > Not so sure, there is low CPU in the Python script,
Yes. > but there may be CPU+disk activity on the database sides [with > cache management and other optimizations on disk access]. That's it. So data queues up on the database side and you won't get much value from faked concurrency with CPU cycles. > So, with a reader thread and a writer thread, he can have a select > on a database performed in parallel with an insert on the other > database. Explain. Remember, threads aren't really working concurrently. Even on a multiprocessor machine you have constraints for IO traffic. (And the GIL exists too) > But, if its only a do-once job, maybe the optimization is net > really necessary. I still don't understand how threads would help optimizing a task that largely depends on IO and will probably be executed on one CPU. Regards, Björn -- BOFH excuse #14: sounds like a Windows problem, try calling Microsoft support -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
