On Mon, Sep 7, 2009 at 2:10 AM, Warren Vick <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Interesting... a drop from 35 to 23 seconds seems quite poor so I wonder if > there is no concurrency occurring at all, just perhaps a better "packing" of > the execution. Alternatively, perhaps the cost of running the threads is > quite high. With just two tile render jobs, I doubt if there is an I/O > bottleneck. I had a recent experience with running two separate processes > (on a quad core machine) which take about an hour each, is that the > execution time is still about the same. i.e. almost perfect parallelism. > > I'll report the results of my own thread vs. process tests in the next day > or two. You could also compare it to the python multiprocessing module (native in Python 2.6+, or available from PyPi for 2.4/2.5). It's interface is virtually the same as the threading module, but it uses separate processes. Rob :)
_______________________________________________ Mapnik-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/mapnik-users
