➜

This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub, and is currently read-only.
For more information, see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.

Author pitrou
Recipients brett.cannon, davin, eric.snow, giampaolo.rodola, lukasz.langa, nascheme, osvenskan, pitrou, pmpp, rhettinger, ronaldoussoren, skrah, terry.reedy, yselivanov
Date 2019-02-12.19:46:21
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1550000782.08.0.282062082797.issue35813@roundup.psfhosted.org>
In-reply-to
Content 
Davin:

> This is my fault because I altered SharedMemoryManager to no longer support functionality from SyncManager that I thought could be confusing to include.  I am just now discovering this and am not immediately sure if simply removing the SharedMemoryManager-relevant lines from your patch is the right solution but I wanted to mention this thought right away.

If SharedMemoryManager subclasses SyncManager then I *think* it should obey the SyncManager contract.  Regardless of the shared memory facility, the user may also want to "shared" regular proxies between processes.

(to be honest, I don't think the multiprocessing Manager facility is used a lot currently...)
History
Date User Action Args
2019-02-12 19:46:22pitrousetrecipients: + pitrou, brett.cannon, nascheme, rhettinger, terry.reedy, ronaldoussoren, osvenskan, giampaolo.rodola, skrah, pmpp, lukasz.langa, eric.snow, yselivanov, davin
2019-02-12 19:46:22pitrousetmessageid: <1550000782.08.0.282062082797.issue35813@roundup.psfhosted.org>
2019-02-12 19:46:22pitroulinkissue35813 messages
2019-02-12 19:46:21pitroucreate