Re: async learning
Leam Hall <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.python.tutor |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 7/4/23 18:21, Mats Wichmann wrote: > On 7/4/23 16:02, Alan Gauld via Tutor wrote: >> On 02/07/2023 13:21, Leam Hall wrote: >>> Until recently, I haven't had a lot of reason to do async stuff. ...> but it runs slower than the non-async version. Thoughts? >> >> I'm no expert but trivial tasks often run slower on async >> architecture than when in a single process, even a single >> thread. >> >> I don;t know how you measured things or what kind of tasks >> you were doing, but if a single task takes less than a few >> milliseconds to execute it's likely that the overheads in >> async are higher than the benefits of concurrency. >> >> Try creating a task that takes some time such as opening a >> file and processing its contents in some >> way(search/sort/convert/calculate something per line, say). Then create >> many such >> files and have your code process them all. That should show >> a gain of some sort. > > This one does (fetches from a url, the classic example of a "slow" operation in computer terms), but... it's not happening in an async function. As a first step, "add_stuff" needs to be an "async def". Thanks! I'll give that a go. The code I posted was the minimum I could find to demonstrate what I was trying to do. Leam -- Software Engineer (reuel.net/resume) Scribe: The Domici War (domiciwar.net) General Ne'er-do-well (github.com/LeamHall) _______________________________________________ Tutor maillist - [email protected] To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/tutor