Kyle Stanley <[email protected]> added the comment:
So, I was finally able to replicate a failure in test_still_running locally, it
required using a rather ridiculous number of parallel workers:
$ ./python -m test test__xxsubinterpreters -j200 -F
...
Exception in thread Thread-7:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/home/aeros/repos/aeros-cpython/Lib/threading.py", line 944, in
_bootstrap_inner
self.run()
File "/home/aeros/repos/aeros-cpython/Lib/threading.py", line 882, in run
self._target(*self._args, **self._kwargs)
File "/home/aeros/repos/aeros-cpython/Lib/test/test__xxsubinterpreters.py",
line 51, in run
interpreters.run_string(interp, dedent(f"""
RuntimeError: unrecognized interpreter ID 39
test test__xxsubinterpreters failed -- Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/home/aeros/repos/aeros-cpython/Lib/test/test__xxsubinterpreters.py",
line 766, in test_still_running
interpreters.destroy(interp)
AssertionError: RuntimeError not raised
...
== Tests result: FAILURE ==
94 tests OK.
1 test failed:
test__xxsubinterpreters
Total duration: 1 min 49 sec
Tests result: FAILURE
OS: Arch Linux x86_64
Kernel: 5.3.11
CPU: Intel i5-4460
I was able to consistently reproduce the above failure using 200 parallel
workers, even without `-f`.
I have a few different theories that I'd like to test for fixing the failure,
I'll report back if any of them yield positive results.
----------
_______________________________________
Python tracker <[email protected]>
<https://bugs.python.org/issue37224>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
