On 10/25/05, David Binger  wrote:
> On Oct 25, 2005, at 6:01 PM, Mike Orr wrote:
> > Durus is held back by its thread unsafety.  I'm not using threads now
> > but I don't want to lock myself out of a multithreaded WSGI server
> > later, for instance.  And multithreaded servers are the most common.
> > Yet I also don't want to convert my data and code from Durus to ZODB
> > when the time comes for threads, especially since the need may arise
> > with short notice.  (A compelling server or library; a need to serve
> > the application on Windows, etc).  That makes me think long and hard
> > about using Durus, even if I don't need ZODB's extra features.
>
> I think that a Durus client process can be multi-threaded as long
> as no Connection instance is used by more than one thread.

But that's precisely what you'd need if every request accesses the
database, and requests are running concurrently in threads.


> We don't use multiple threads for anything here, though, so
> we have no evidence one way or the other.  It would be useful
> if someone would really test this or study the code and determine
> what obstacles may exist.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


--
Mike Orr  or