But multithreading will suffer the problem of GIL doesn't it ?
On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 7:33 PM, CRV§ADER//KY <crusaderky(a)gmail.com> wrote:
So all you've got is disk io and opencl calls. You only need 1
On 17 Aug 2016 19:03, "Marcos Paulo Rocha" <markao01(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> In a application that i'm working, the programs is written in a form of a
> graph. A example of part of one application is bellow:
> [image: Inline image 1]
> Each node of the graph is a different process. When a node receive all of
> your inputs, he is ready to start. This way, concurrency occurs naturally
> between some nodes of the graph.
> One of the goals of the library that i'm working, is to make easy,
> development of applications with the behavior of the image. The ideia is
> that nodes: Nodes CP_IN, CP_OUT and EX_KERNEL can be used to abstract the
> copy, kernel setup and invocation to the final user.
> I hope that now i have make myself clear about my goals and you can help
> me to solve this problem.
> Best Regards,
> Marcos Rocha
> On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 1:35 PM, Andreas Kloeckner <
> lists(a)informa.tiker.net> wrote:
>> Marcos Paulo Rocha <markao01(a)gmail.com> writes:
>> > Thanks for reply Andreas.
>> > Andreas, i need to access PyOpenCL objects in another process because
>> > working in a dataflow library and i would like to make copy and kernels
>> > calls in parallel. I'm doing asynchronous copies and need that process
>> > responsible for executing kernel receive event object of copy and the
>> > buffer to set as kernel parameter. So there is another way to achieve
>> > behavior without using pickle ?
>> I'm not sure what goal the different processes achieve here. To do
>> concurrent copy and kernel invocations, all you need is two different
>> commandqueues (from a single thread even). Just submit the copies to one
>> and the kernel to the other. They'll run in parallel if the hardware is
>> capable of doing that.