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 gregory.p.smith
Recipients Rhamphoryncus, amaury.forgeotdarc, gregory.p.smith, jnoller, mikemccand, pitrou, tzot
Date 2008-07-13.06:18:01
SpamBayes Score 0.0048583
Marked as misclassified No
Message-id <>
I still don't like the _after_fork() implementation.  Its O(n) where n
== number of threads the parent process had.

Very wasteful when the fork() was done in the most common case of being
followed by an exec and calling os._exit().  It won't scale nicely with
system load (forks will start taking longer and longer the more threads

Could os.fork() be extended to have an optional will_exec_or_die
parameter that determines if _after_fork() is even called at all? 
Things like subprocess should pass in True.  The default should be False
for compatiblity.
Date User Action Args
2008-07-13 06:18:05gregory.p.smithsetspambayes_score: 0.0048583 -> 0.0048583
recipients: + gregory.p.smith, mikemccand, tzot, amaury.forgeotdarc, Rhamphoryncus, pitrou, jnoller
2008-07-13 06:18:05gregory.p.smithsetspambayes_score: 0.0048583 -> 0.0048583
messageid: <>
2008-07-13 06:18:03gregory.p.smithlinkissue874900 messages
2008-07-13 06:18:02gregory.p.smithcreate