Re: Python plugin API locking (patch)

[Michael Edenfield <kutulu@kutulu.org>]

* Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro <gjc@inescporto.pt> [031007 06:06]:
> A Seg, 2003-10-06 ?s 21:07, Michael Edenfield escreveu:
> > I'm willing to do the huge amount of work, though it will obviously take
> > a huge amount of time :)
> > 
> > My main problems are twofold: 1) I dunno if it would even be accepted
> > into the main source tree, and 2) it makes no sense to use Windows
> > threading for Windows and POSIX threading for everything else.  There
> > are pthread libraries for Windows, or I would probably work up some kind
> > of compatibility headers (tcl, python, etc. all have to do this as
> > well), but I don't have nearly as much POSIX threading experience as
> > Windows threading experience.
> 
>   IMHO, glib thread abstraction is the way to go:
> 	http://developer.gnome.org/doc/API/2.0/glib/glib-Threads.html
> 
>   Regards.

Yes, I actually just found this when looking back over the recent Python
locking issues.  And it's exactly what I was looking for to get started.
I'm working on my first lock: a simple mutex lock on the output buffers
for sessions, to allow multiple threads to hold a session reference and
write output later on.  If that goes smoothlyI will have a better idea
how much effort, and how disruptive, locking in general would be.

--Mike

PGP signature