On Tue, 11 Jan 2022 16:38:01 +0200 Yordan Karadzhov <y.karadz@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hmm, I am not 100% sure, but I still think this is the case. > In your link, if you go down a bit you have > > "If you’re not sure if you want to use Python threading, asyncio, or multiprocessing, then you can check out Speed Up > Your Python Program With Concurrency." > > where " Speed Up Your Python Program With Concurrency" is a link to here: > https://realpython.com/python-concurrency/ > > and here if you scroll down to the first table, you will see that multiprocessing is the only real way to run Python on > multiple CPUs. > > You can have a look also here > https://docs.python.org/3/library/threading.html > > "In CPython, due to the Global Interpreter Lock, only one thread can execute Python code at once (even though certain > performance-oriented libraries might overcome this limitation). If you want your application to make better use of the > computational resources of multi-core machines, you are advised to use multiprocessing or > concurrent.futures.ProcessPoolExecutor. However, threading is still an appropriate model if you want to run multiple > I/O-bound tasks simultaneously." Well, it doesn't affect the API so we can always change it in the future. -- Steve
|