This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub ,
and is currently read-only.
For more information,
see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.
| Author | vstinner |
|---|---|
| Recipients | gregory.p.smith, pablogsal, ronaldoussoren, serhiy.storchaka, vstinner |
| Date | 2018年09月18日.13:54:55 |
| SpamBayes Score | -1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified | Yes |
| Message-id | <1537278895.99.0.956365154283.issue34663@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content | |
|---|---|
Serhiy Storchaka: "If this is an optimization, what is the downside of always using vfork()?" I don't know the vfork() function, but you can find articles like: "vfork considered dangerous" (old article of 2012) https://ewontfix.com/7/ But it's unclear to me if vfork() drawbacks also affect posix_spawn(). posix_spawn() is well defined: call vfork() and then immediately exec(). Another article: "First is that vfork pauses the parent thread while the child executes and eventually calls an exec family function, this is a huge latency problem for applications." https://developers.redhat.com/blog/2015/08/19/launching-helper-process-under-memory-and-latency-constraints-pthread_create-and-vfork/ |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2018年09月18日 13:54:56 | vstinner | set | recipients: + vstinner, gregory.p.smith, ronaldoussoren, serhiy.storchaka, pablogsal |
| 2018年09月18日 13:54:55 | vstinner | set | messageid: <1537278895.99.0.956365154283.issue34663@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2018年09月18日 13:54:55 | vstinner | link | issue34663 messages |
| 2018年09月18日 13:54:55 | vstinner | create | |