On 26 October 2011 11:23, Dag Sverre Seljebotn
wrote:
> On 10/26/2011 11:45 AM, mark florisson wrote:
>>
>> On 26 October 2011 08:56, Stefan Behnel wrote:
>>>
>>> Greg Ewing, 26.10.2011 00:27:
Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
> I'd gladly take a factor two (or even four) slowdown of
On 10/26/2011 12:29 PM, Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
On 10/26/2011 11:45 AM, mark florisson wrote:
On 26 October 2011 08:56, Stefan Behnel wrote:
Greg Ewing, 26.10.2011 00:27:
Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
I'd gladly take a factor two (or even four) slowdown of CPython
code any
day to get rid
On 10/26/2011 11:45 AM, mark florisson wrote:
On 26 October 2011 08:56, Stefan Behnel wrote:
Greg Ewing, 26.10.2011 00:27:
Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
I'd gladly take a factor two (or even four) slowdown of CPython code any
day to get rid of the GIL :-). The thing is, sometimes one has 48 c
On 10/26/2011 11:45 AM, mark florisson wrote:
On 26 October 2011 08:56, Stefan Behnel wrote:
Greg Ewing, 26.10.2011 00:27:
Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
I'd gladly take a factor two (or even four) slowdown of CPython code any
day to get rid of the GIL :-). The thing is, sometimes one has 48 c
On 26 October 2011 08:56, Stefan Behnel wrote:
> Greg Ewing, 26.10.2011 00:27:
>>
>> Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
>>
>>> I'd gladly take a factor two (or even four) slowdown of CPython code any
>>> day to get rid of the GIL :-). The thing is, sometimes one has 48 cores
>>> and consider a 10x speedu
Greg Ewing, 26.10.2011 00:27:
Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
I'd gladly take a factor two (or even four) slowdown of CPython code any
day to get rid of the GIL :-). The thing is, sometimes one has 48 cores
and consider a 10x speedup better than nothing...
Another thing to consider is that lockin
