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 | pitrou |
|---|---|
| Recipients | Rhamphoryncus, amaury.forgeotdarc, gregory.p.smith, jnoller, mikemccand, pitrou, tzot |
| Date | 2008年07月15日.18:33:50 |
| SpamBayes Score | 0.065039545 |
| Marked as misclassified | No |
| Message-id | <1216146832.45.0.429816728859.issue874900@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content | |
|---|---|
> I still don't like the _after_fork() implementation. Its O(n) where n > == number of threads the parent process had. It may be O(n) but the inner loop looks very cheap. Even with n == 1000 I'm not sure it would make a difference. However, are you sure the system thread identifier stays the same after a fork? I see that in _after_fork() you reuse the old ident for new_active instead of getting it from get_ident(). |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2008年07月15日 18:33:52 | pitrou | set | spambayes_score: 0.0650395 -> 0.065039545 recipients: + pitrou, gregory.p.smith, mikemccand, tzot, amaury.forgeotdarc, Rhamphoryncus, jnoller |
| 2008年07月15日 18:33:52 | pitrou | set | spambayes_score: 0.0650395 -> 0.0650395 messageid: <1216146832.45.0.429816728859.issue874900@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2008年07月15日 18:33:51 | pitrou | link | issue874900 messages |
| 2008年07月15日 18:33:50 | pitrou | create | |