On vrijdag, augustus 30, 2002, at 10:35 , Tim Peters wrote:

>  [Jack Jansen]
> > On vrijdag, augustus 30, 2002, at 06:12 , Tim Peters wrote:
> 
>  Jack, I'm never on vrijdag -- vrijdag is illegal in the US <wink>.

Oh? Didn't realize that, thought they hadn't gotten any further 
then outlawing
rookdag and drinkdag yet.

> > Some wild ideas:
> > - Use an exponential (or linear?) backoff. If you attempt to
> > switch and nothing happens you double the check interval, up to
> > a maximum. If you do switch you reset to the minimum.
> 
>  On a pthreads system under 2.3, using semaphores, chances are 
>  good it will
>  always switch.  But unless you're trying to fake soft realtime, 
>  it's a real
>  drag on performance to switch so often  We can't out-guess 
>  this, because it
>  depends on what the *app* wants.  Most apps aren't trying to fake soft
>  realtime, so favoring less frequent switches is a good default.

Agreed. But the main application I was thinking of are along the 
lines of one thread
doing real computational work and the others doing GUI stuff or 
serving web-requests
or some such. I.e. while busy you care about response for other 
threads, but you don't
want to spend too many cycles on it.

I remember seeing bad artefacts of having a large value for the 
check interval, such as
bad responsiveness to control-C, but it could well be that this 
was MacPython-OS9
specific.

>  You need a model for what it is you're trying [...]

I though you said you didn't have vrijdag?
--
- Jack Jansen        <Jack.Jansen@[...].com>         
http://www.cwi.nl/~jack -
- If I can't dance I don't want to be part of your revolution -- 
Emma Goldman -


_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@[...].org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev