Re: [Python-Dev] Support for async read/write

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 20/10/10 00:58, Antoine Pitrou wrote: > It would be nice to know about the use case Jesus has in mind. I am thinking about the cases where a request come, you do some disk read in behalf of it and you reply. If the read is "slow" (if not cached, y

Re: [Python-Dev] Support for async read/write

On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 2:55 PM, Glyph Lefkowitz wrote: > > On Oct 20, 2010, at 12:31 AM, Jeffrey Yasskin wrote: > > No comment on the rest of your claim, but this is a silly argument. > The standard says the same thing about at least fcntl.h, signal.h, > pthread.h, and ucontext.h, which clearly a

Re: [Python-Dev] Support for async read/write

On Oct 20, 2010, at 12:31 AM, Jeffrey Yasskin wrote: > No comment on the rest of your claim, but this is a silly argument. > The standard says the same thing about at least fcntl.h, signal.h, > pthread.h, and ucontext.h, which clearly are useful. It was meant to be tongue-in-cheek :). Perhaps I

Re: [Python-Dev] Support for async read/write

On Oct 19, 2010, at 9:55 PM, exar...@twistedmatrix.com wrote: >> Not only is the performance usually worse than expected, the behavior of >> aio_* functions require all kinds of subtle and mysterious coordination with >> signal handling, which I'm not entirely sure Python would even be able to

Re: [Python-Dev] Support for async read/write

On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 8:37 PM, Glyph Lefkowitz wrote: > I'd like to echo this sentiment.  This is not about providing a 'safe' > wrapper to hide some powerful feature of these APIs: the POSIX aio_* > functions are really completely useless. > To quote the relevant standard >

Re: [Python-Dev] Support for async read/write

On 01:37 am, gl...@twistedmatrix.com wrote: On Oct 19, 2010, at 8:09 PM, James Y Knight wrote: There's a difference. os._exit is useful. os.open is useful. aio_* are *not* useful. For anything. If there's anything you think you want to use them for, you're wrong. It either won't work properl

Re: [Python-Dev] Support for async read/write

On Oct 19, 2010, at 8:09 PM, James Y Knight wrote: > There's a difference. > > os._exit is useful. os.open is useful. aio_* are *not* useful. For anything. > If there's anything you think you want to use them for, you're wrong. It > either won't work properly or it will worse performing than t

Re: [Python-Dev] Support for async read/write

On Oct 19, 2010, at 6:44 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote: >> So, in conclusion, I disagree that adding wrappers for these would be >> nice. It wouldn't. It would cause some people to think they would be >> useful things to call, and they would always be wrong. > > We are all consenting adults. If peopl

Re: [Python-Dev] Support for async read/write

Le mercredi 20 octobre 2010 à 00:48 +0200, "Martin v. Löwis" a écrit : > > Also, the canonical way to do file I/O in Python 3 is the `io` lib, > > therefore it would be a bit of a shame to have separate, non-integrated > > `aio_*` functions. > > I disagree. We also have posix.open, posix.dup, etc.

Re: [Python-Dev] Support for async read/write

> Also, the canonical way to do file I/O in Python 3 is the `io` lib, > therefore it would be a bit of a shame to have separate, non-integrated > `aio_*` functions. I disagree. We also have posix.open, posix.dup, etc. We always expose POSIX functions in the posix module (except for the socket func

Re: [Python-Dev] Support for async read/write

> So, in conclusion, I disagree that adding wrappers for these would be > nice. It wouldn't. It would cause some people to think they would be > useful things to call, and they would always be wrong. We are all consenting adults. If people want to shoot themselves in their feet, we let them. For e

Re: [Python-Dev] Support for async read/write

Am 19.10.2010 19:47, schrieb exar...@twistedmatrix.com: > On 04:50 pm, j...@jcea.es wrote: >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- >> Hash: SHA1 >> >> Current Python lacks support for "aio_*" syscalls to do async IO. I >> think this could be a nice addition for python 3.3. > > Adding more platform w

Re: [Python-Dev] Support for async read/write

Hello Jesus, > Current Python lacks support for "aio_*" syscalls to do async IO. I > think this could be a nice addition for python 3.3. > > If you agree, I will create an issue in the tracker. If you think the > idea is of no value, please say so for me to move on. Maybe an 3th party > module,

Re: [Python-Dev] Support for async read/write

On Oct 19, 2010, at 1:47 PM, exar...@twistedmatrix.com wrote: > Adding more platform wrappers is always nice. Keep in mind that the quality > of most (all?) aio_* implementations is spotty at best, though. On Linux, > they will sometimes block (for example, if you fail to align buffers > prop

Re: [Python-Dev] Support for async read/write

You should file a new issue on the bug tracker but unless you have a patch to propose it's unlikely that someone else is gonna implement it. Regards --- Giampaolo http://code.google.com/p/pyftpdlib/ http://code.google.com/p/psutil/ 2010/10/19 Jesus Cea : > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- >

Re: [Python-Dev] Support for async read/write

On 04:50 pm, j...@jcea.es wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Current Python lacks support for "aio_*" syscalls to do async IO. I think this could be a nice addition for python 3.3. Adding more platform wrappers is always nice. Keep in mind that the quality of most (all?) ai

Re: [Python-Dev] Support for async read/write

Yes, that would be a nice addition. -peter On 10/19/10 12:50 PM, "Jesus Cea" wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Current Python lacks support for "aio_*" syscalls to do async IO. I > think this could be a nice addition for python 3.3. > > If you agree, I will create a

[Python-Dev] Support for async read/write

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Current Python lacks support for "aio_*" syscalls to do async IO. I think this could be a nice addition for python 3.3. If you agree, I will create an issue in the tracker. If you think the idea is of no value, please say so for me to move on. Maybe a