I'm not sure this is true or not, but it's something I think is the case (untested)... It seems that running twisted in a separate thread would be better for keeping more consistent latency in networking. If you wanted to run your networking at different frequencies to the rest of your system. It seems that some of the time, this would be the case. Much like sound requires updating at different frequencies. Iterating it at eg. 72fps means that the quickest data can go out is at 1/72 messages per second? If you don't have a consistent frame rate, say a frame too 1/14th of a second because of some heavy graphics - then messages would only come out every 1/14th of a second. Whereas if you ran twisted in another thread it would be separate of those concerns - and could run at a different frequency. Maybe a lower frequency even. As a bonus all your networking stuff can be handled by a separate CPU/Core if available. Or am I way off here? Maybe it doesn't matter. On 6/6/07, Simon Wittber <simonwittber@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Richard Jones just mentioned to me off list how he is using twisted.
(He is having issues with the mailing list).
Using twisted like this is not intrusive, as it lets me keep control
of the main loop. Thanks Richard!
We've just run into this ourselves, but in our case integrating Twisted
into a pyglet application (though not into its event system yet - just
into the main loop).
The docs are extremely sparse in this area, but the following is mostly
working for us:
reactor.startRunning(1) (or 0 if you don't want it to take
over signals)
while main_loop:
reactor.iterate(0.01)
then when you want to exit your program, use:
reactor.stop(); reactor.iterate(0.01)