[Twisted-Python] Possibly of interest
jarrod.roberson at gmail.com
Mon Aug 22 13:16:29 EDT 2005
On 8/22/05, Michael Sparks <ms at cerenity.org> wrote:
> [ Please excuse me if this isn't of interest. I saw this and suspected
> people here might be interested (whether agreed with or not) though - if
> it isn't, my apologies! ]
> I was forwarded a link to this paper just recently (and skimming the past
> 5-6 months of archives here it doesn't look like it's been posted to this
> list). Since it looks interesting I thought I'd forward a copy to
you have to take this paper in CONTEXT of the previous paper tha one of
these same authors wrote about a year earlier.
The SEDA paper ->
Where they come to the exact OPPOSITE conclusion :-)
It is all good reading!
They are NOT promoting threads as much as they are promoting a better
scheduler for threads. Which is what SEDA ( and Twisted ) provide with the
event driven model.
Their basic conclusion is that EXISTING threading implementations are too
general/generic and a more specialized scheduler that is way more effiecent
would make Threaded programs scale better AND have the more friendly Thread
Until someone picks up thair Carpaccio project and make it produciton
worthy, we will probably just have to keep dealing with the complexity of
event driven async programming idioms like Twisted.
If you don't know what you want, you probably need a nap.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Twisted-Python