[issue44738] io_uring as a new backend to selectors and asyncio

Terry J. Reedy added the comment: Continue the discussion, including adding new info, to the #41271 -- nosy: +terry.reedy resolution: -> duplicate stage: -> resolved status: open -> closed superseder: -> Add support for io_uring to cpython ___ Py

[issue44738] io_uring as a new backend to selectors and asyncio

Joongi Kim added the comment: As in the previous discussion, instead of tackling stdlib right away, it would be nice to evaluate the approach using 3rd-party libs, such as trio and/or async-tokio, or maybe a new library. I have a strong feeling that we need to improve the async file I/O. AFA

[issue44738] io_uring as a new backend to selectors and asyncio

Joongi Kim added the comment: Ah, yes, but one year has passed so it may be another chance to discuss its adoption, as new advances like tokio_uring became available. -- ___ Python tracker _

[issue44738] io_uring as a new backend to selectors and asyncio

Nathaniel Smith added the comment: I think this is a dupe of issue41271? -- ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing lis

[issue44738] io_uring as a new backend to selectors and asyncio

New submission from Joongi Kim : This is a rough early idea suggestion on adding io_uring as an alternative I/O multiplexing mechanism in Python (maybe selectors and asyncio). io_uring is a relatively new I/O mechanism introduced in Linux kernel 5.1 or later. https://lwn.net/Articles/776703/