Guido van Rossum added the comment: > The easy solution was to check if the queue was empty and skip the read (get > call) if there was nothing in the queue.
There's an API for that -- get_nowait(). I'm happy to review a fix if you come up with one. But I currently don't have time to devise a fix myself. (Not even a docfix, if you think that's sufficient, but if you submit one it will swiftly be applied.) On Mon, Feb 1, 2016 at 9:28 AM, Jonas Brunsgaard <rep...@bugs.python.org> wrote: > > Jonas Brunsgaard added the comment: > > In my particular case, I developed an application close to beanstalkd, but > with redis as "engine". I did create a callbackback reader class for users to > subclass, the callbackreader is checking every second, on every > tube(queue.Object). If new data has arrived for processing (this subroutine > is using queue.get with wait_for). Maybe asyncio.Condition would have been > the better choice. The easy solution was to check if the queue was empty and > skip the read (get call) if there was nothing in the queue. > > Before my fix, over a week the program would take up 10 Gigs of memory in our > staging environment if nothing was touched, so I was assigned to investigate > the cause. I think the current behavior is undesirable and cumbersome to see > through, and if not changed there should be some kind of note in the > documentation, so other good python folks will have a better chance to > understand the behavior without reading the cpython asyncio queue > implementation. > > ---------- > > _______________________________________ > Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> > <http://bugs.python.org/issue26259> > _______________________________________ ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue26259> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
