En Fri, 28 Sep 2007 00:52:57 -0300, wink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escribi�:
> Interesting, from the documentation for deque says;
> "Deques support thread-safe, ..." which would seem to
> imply a mutex of some sort would be used. But in
> looking at collectionsmodule.c for 2.5.1 I don't see
> any mutex
>
> That't not the reason. A Queue is built around a container, and it happens
> to be a deque in the default implementation. But the important thing is
> that a Queue is a synchronized object - it performs the necesary
> synchronization to ensure proper operation even from multiple threads
> attem
En Thu, 27 Sep 2007 01:43:32 -0300, wink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escribi�:
> You are most correct, but Queue is slow compared to deque but
> not for the reason I guessed. Apparently it's because deque is
> implemented in C while Queue is in python. Using the program below
> it looks there is about a 3
Fredrik,
You are most correct, but Queue is slow compared to deque but
not for the reason I guessed. Apparently it's because deque is
implemented in C while Queue is in python. Using the program below
it looks there is about a 35:1 speed difference.
100 d.append 0.11s 0.1097us p
wink wrote:
> But its performance is poor if the number of items on a
> Queue becomes large because it is implemented using a list.
> One of the things I was thinking of was doing another implementation
> using of Queue which was based on deque.
Updating from 2.3 to something newer will fix that
On Sep 26, 4:47 am, wink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
To make it easier to comment on the code, I'm including
"mproc.py" file below. Fredrik, was commenting about using
Queue and in fact I do. Queue is quite nice and is also
thread safe, which is a requirement for this implementation.
But its perform
On 2007-09-26, wink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm getting my feet wet in Python and thought I'd try to see how well
> Python works for asynchronous messaging. I've been using asynchronous
Have a look at Twisted (www.twistedmatrix.com)
Albert
-
wink wrote:
> This provides two benefits, a sender is never directly effected by the
> receiver and since the receiver handles only one message at a time
> it generally never has to use mutexes or semaphores. This allows for
> the programmer to use multiple threads without having to contend with t
Hello,
I'm getting my feet wet in Python and thought I'd try to see how well
Python works for asynchronous messaging. I've been using asynchronous
messaging for 5 years and find it advantageous for many things. In the
scheme I use communication is not only asynchronous but
