Home Original page

Multiple threads

Dave Angel d at davea.name
Wed Nov 16 13:30:39 EST 2011 
On 11/16/2011 01:22 PM, Dave Angel wrote:
> (You're top-posting.  Put your remarks AFTER what you're quoting)
>
> On 11/16/2011 12:52 PM, Jack Keegan wrote:
>> Ok, I thought that processes would do the same job as threads. So 
>> would the
>> general rule be some thing like so:
>>
>> If I want another piece of work to run (theoretically) along side my 
>> main
>> script, and I want to share data between them, I should use a thread and
>> share data with the thread-safe queue.
>> If the work I want done can function and complete on its own, go for a
>> process.
>>
>> Would that be about right?
>>
>
> Yes, with all the caveats I mentioned before.  With some language 
> implementations, and with some operating systems, and on some 
> CPU-systems, the guidelines could be different.  They all trade off in 
> ways too complex to describe here.
>
> For example, if a thread is mostly doing I/O, it may be just as 
> efficient as a separate process, even if sharing data isn't an issue.
>
> And in some languages, sharing data between processes isn't all that 
> tough, either.
>
>
Well, you sent me a mail without including the list (just use 
Reply-All), and I tried to add the list in.  Unfortunately, I picked the 
wrong one, so i sent this to Tutor by mistake.  I'll try to fix that 
now, sorry.




-- 

DaveA
More information about the Python-list mailing list