Hi, On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 1:44 AM, hyar...@iinet.net.au <hyar...@iinet.net.au> wrote: > (...) Wrapping each bytecode in an STM > transaction would give you an as-if-serial execution order, again with no > guarantees > about which order. You get transaction overheads instead of lock/unlock > overheads, > but some STM systems can be quite efficient for short transactions that rarely > conflict.
Yes, I also thought about this as one of the solutions that would "fit the model" of PyPy by not needing changes all over the place. However, I am unsure that the performance of STM is good enough for that application so far. Maybe I'm wrong, but I fear (a priori, with no precise experience) that it would be really too slow to wrap *all* memory reads and writes with the STM machinery. I would be interested in learning if I'm wrong, or if there are hardware solutions around the corner ready to be tried. A bientôt, Armin. _______________________________________________ pypy-dev@codespeak.net http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/pypy-dev
