In article <mailman.2809.1343809166.4697.python-l...@python.org>, Laszlo Nagy <gand...@shopzeus.com> wrote:
> Yes, I think that is correct. Instead of detaching a child process, you > can create independent processes and use other frameworks for IPC. For > example, Pyro. It is not as effective as multiprocessing.Queue, but in > return, you will have the option to run your service across multiple > servers. You might want to look at beanstalk (http://kr.github.com/beanstalkd/). We've been using it in production for the better part of two years. At a 30,000 foot level, it's an implementation of queues over named pipes over TCP, but it takes care of a zillion little details for you. Setup is trivial, and there's clients for all sorts of languages. For a Python client, go with beanstalkc (pybeanstalk appears to be abandonware). > > The most effective IPC is usually through shared memory. But there is no > OS independent standard Python module that can communicate over shared > memory. It's true that shared memory is faster than serializing objects over a TCP connection. On the other hand, it's hard to imagine anything written in Python where you would notice the difference. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
