RetroSearch Browse

Wed Nov 5 02:41:46 EST 2003 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2003-November/039987.html

On Wednesday 05 November 2003 02:28 am, Gregory P. Smith wrote:
   ...
> This was brought up before 2.3.2 was released.  The docs already state
> this in a nice and obvious warning:
>
>   http://www.python.org/doc/2.3.2/lib/module-bsddb.html

You are entirely right: indeed, it's documented with *exemplary* clarity.

> My vote it to leave bsddb in 2.3.2 as it is and not try to port the
> thread support over from 2.4cvs.  It is not ready.

Absolutely.  The fully-documented limitation of 2.3.*'s bsddb interface wrt 
multi-threading should be left alone even if we felt somewhat certain about
a new implementation: enhancing functionality at the risk of introducing bugs
is _not_ what the maintenance branch is about.  Knowing that the new
implementation isn't fully mature just reinforces this.

> The bsddb module has never supported multithreaded use in any past version
> of python.  If the simple bsddb/__init__.py interface can support it
> for 2.4 thats great.  It should always be recommended that people use
> the full bsddb.db when threads are involved.

OK.  This sounds very wise to me.

> If simple bsddb still has non-trivial to describe multithreaded deadlock
> issues by the time a 2.4 release draws near I'll suggest pulling it out.
> (before then i need to write a test case to prove that it does actually
> have these problems)

Again, very advisable!

Alex

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2003-November/039987.html below:

[Python-Dev] simple bsddb interface thread support 2.3.x vs 2.4