Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 23:07:15 -0600 From: Adam Vande More <amvandemore@gmail.com> To: Chuck Swiger <cswiger@mac.com> Cc: d@delphij.net, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, freebsd-python@freebsd.org Subject: Re: python and HUGE_STACK_SIZE Message-ID: <6201873e1003242207m49351c55id94341d872fd8e17@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <2D129848-8A41-4BB5-A58C-A9A35D5FBD9A@mac.com> References: <4702BA39-7C18-45C3-9920-9E460502B58F@freebsd.org> <4BAA9C32.6040606@delphij.net> <2D129848-8A41-4BB5-A58C-A9A35D5FBD9A@mac.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 5:50 PM, Chuck Swiger <cswiger@mac.com> wrote: > > I've run and written quite a bit of Python (including Trac, Mailman, the > Python IDE, our own custom stuff [like some log munging and web processing > stuff], and even a few graphical Python games) without ever turning > HUGE_STACK_SIZE on. > > I don't have any objection to turning it on, but it's not needed by default > for most things. YMMV. > > Yes, I've had the same experience. When doing socket level python stuff, I've had to increase the buffer size, which seems to be at least indirectly related to stack size but setting it manually has been easy enough. Are there any negative repercussions to turning on huge ie like would scripts start using more memory, or is just giving them the ability to use it without explicitly setting it? -- Adam Vande More
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?6201873e1003242207m49351c55id94341d872fd8e17>