Tim Wintle schrieb: > Thanks for both replies, > > On Mon, 2009-02-09 at 15:59 +0100, Christian Heimes wrote: >> You shouldn't use the thread module directly. It's not meant to be used >> by a user. Please stick to the threading module. You won't notice a >> slowdown, trust me :) > I'm aware that thread is being renamed to _thread in python 3.0, but is > it being depricated or anything like that? > > This is for an app that has been running for quite a long time and it's > now time for fairly heavy optimisations as load is increasing (Believe > me, I wouldn't have been looking at the C otherwise) - so I'll see if I > do notice any effect with threading.
[snip] > Thanks for the info - I'm very aware of the GIL, but had never looked at > the implementation before and for some reason thought that python's > threads were in userspace. > > I'm already using a multiple-process architecture overall, but using > threads to avoid waiting when handling SQL and TCP. The module was renamed to _thread to stop people from using it directly. The extension module is the interface to some low level types and functions. Especially the usage of thread.start_new_thread is problematic, since it bypasses Python's high level threading API. For the rest I have to agree with Jean-Paul. If you need performance don't use threads! Threads and performance are orthogonal -- sometimes they are even contradictorily. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
