Why is there no GIL in the Java Virtual Machine? Why does Python need one so bad?

Posted on

Question :

Why is there no GIL in the Java Virtual Machine? Why does Python need one so bad?

I’m hoping someone can provide some insight as to what’s fundamentally different about the Java Virtual Machine that allows it to implement threads nicely without the need for a Global Interpreter Lock (GIL), while Python necessitates such an evil.

Answer #1:

Python (the language) doesn’t need a GIL (which is why it can perfectly be implemented on JVM [Jython] and .NET [IronPython], and those implementations multithread freely). CPython (the popular implementation) has always used a GIL for ease of coding (esp. the coding of the garbage collection mechanisms) and of integration of non-thread-safe C-coded libraries (there used to be a ton of those around;-).

The Unladen Swallow project, among other ambitious goals, does plan a GIL-free virtual machine for Python — to quote that site, “In addition, we intend to remove the GIL and fix the state of multithreading in Python. We believe this is possible through the implementation of a more sophisticated GC system, something like IBM’s Recycler (Bacon et al, 2001).”

Answered By: Alex Martelli

Answer #2:

The JVM (at least hotspot) does have a similar concept to the “GIL”, it’s just much finer in its lock granularity, most of this comes from the GC’s in hotspot which are more advanced.

In CPython it’s one big lock (probably not that true, but good enough for arguments sake), in the JVM it’s more spread about with different concepts depending on where it is used.

Take a look at, for example, vm/runtime/safepoint.hpp in the hotspot code, which is effectively a barrier. Once at a safepoint the entire VM has stopped with regard to java code, much like the python VM stops at the GIL.

In the Java world such VM pausing events are known as “stop-the-world”, at these points only native code that is bound to certain criteria is free running, the rest of the VM has been stopped.

Also the lack of a coarse lock in java makes JNI much more difficult to write, as the JVM makes less guarantees about its environment for FFI calls, one of the things that cpython makes fairly easy (although not as easy as using ctypes).

Answered By: Greg Bowyer

Answer #3:

There is a comment down below in this blog post http://www.grouplens.org/node/244 that hints at the reason why it was so easy dispense with a GIL for IronPython or Jython, it is that CPython uses reference counting whereas the other 2 VMs have garbage collectors.

The exact mechanics of why this is so I don’t get, but it does sounds like a plausible reason.

Answered By: user235859

Answer #4:

In this link they have the following explanation:

… “Parts of the Interpreter aren’t threadsafe, though mostly because making them all threadsafe by massive lock usage would slow single-threaded extremely (source). This seems to be related to the CPython garbage collector using reference counting (the JVM and CLR don’t, and therefore don’t need to lock/release a reference count every time). But even if someone thought of an acceptable solution and implemented it, third party libraries would still have the same problems.”

Answered By: Oliver Wilken

Answer #5:

Python lacks jit/aot and the time frame it was written at multithreaded processors didn’t exist. Alternatively you could recompile everything in Julia lang which lacks GIL and gain some speed boost on your Python code. Also Jython kind of sucks it’s slower than Cpython and Java. If you want to stick to Python consider using parallel plugins, you won’t gain an instant speed boost but you can do parallel programming with the right plugin.

Answered By: Jim

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.