On Mon, 9 Dec 2019 21:42:36 -0500 Kyle Stanley <aeros...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > (b) Why limit coroutines? It's just another Python object and has no > operating resources associated with it. Perhaps your definition of > coroutine is different, and you are thinking of OS threads? > > This was my primary concern with the proposed PEP. At the moment, it's > rather trivial to create one million coroutines, and the total memory taken > up by each individual coroutine object is very minimal compared to each OS > thread. > > There's also a practical use case for having a large number of coroutine > objects, such as for asynchronously: > > 1) Handling a large number of concurrent clients on a continuously running > web server that receives a significant amount of traffic. Not sure how that works? Each client has an accepted socket, which is bound to a local port number, and there are 65536 TCP port numbers available. Unless you're using 15+ coroutines per client, you probably won't reach 1M coroutines that way. > 2) Sending a large number of concurrent database transactions to run on a > cluster of database servers. 1M concurrent database transactions? Does that sound reasonable at all? Your database administrator probably won't like you. > something like this definitely scales over time. Arbitrarily placing a > limit on the total number of coroutine objects doesn't make sense to me for > that reason. There are a lot of arbitrary limits inside a computer system. You just aren't aware of them because you don't hit them in practice. Claiming that limits shouldn't exist is just pointless. Regards Antoine. _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list -- python-dev@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-dev-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-dev.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-dev@python.org/message/O3ZODXHEIJ2SM5SZBOVJ4PIAQMSYNXEJ/ Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
