Changes by s7v7nislands s7v7nisla...@gmail.com:
--
nosy: +s7v7nislands
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue11635
___
___
Roundup Robot devnull@devnull added the comment:
New changeset 4390d6939a56 by Antoine Pitrou in branch '3.2':
Issue #11635: Don't use polling in worker threads and processes launched by
http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/4390d6939a56
New changeset a76257a99636 by Antoine Pitrou in branch
Antoine Pitrou pit...@free.fr added the comment:
I've now pushed the patch. I hope this won't break anything, closing.
--
resolution: - fixed
stage: patch review - committed/rejected
status: open - closed
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
Roundup Robot devnull@devnull added the comment:
New changeset 76a898433a02 by Antoine Pitrou in branch '3.2':
Add tests for the atexit hook in concurrent.futures (part of #11635)
http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/76a898433a02
New changeset d6bbde982c1c by Antoine Pitrou in branch 'default':
Add
Antoine Pitrou pit...@free.fr added the comment:
Tests now committed, here is a patch without them.
--
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file21373/cfpolling4.patch
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue11635
Antoine Pitrou pit...@free.fr added the comment:
After studying the multiprocessing code, it turns out that Queue.get() with a
timeout does its own rather high-frequency polling under Windows (see
Modules/_multiprocessing/pipe_connection.c). Therefore, here is an updated
patch which doesn't
Brian Quinlan br...@sweetapp.com added the comment:
Your approach seems workable but your patch allows the interpreter to exit
while work items are still being processed. See the comment at the top of
concurrent/futures/thread.py.
--
___
Python
Antoine Pitrou pit...@free.fr added the comment:
Your approach seems workable but your patch allows the interpreter to
exit while work items are still being processed. See the comment at
the top of concurrent/futures/thread.py.
Why are you saying that? In my patch, _python_exit() still takes
Brian Quinlan br...@sweetapp.com added the comment:
Sorry, I didn't read an error message very carefully. When I apply your patch I
see:
from concurrent.futures import *
from time import *
t = ThreadPoolExecutor(5)
t.submit(sleep, 100)
Future at 0x8acc94c state=running
ctrl-D
Error in
Antoine Pitrou pit...@free.fr added the comment:
Sorry, I didn't read an error message very carefully. When I apply your patch
I see:
from concurrent.futures import *
from time import *
t = ThreadPoolExecutor(5)
t.submit(sleep, 100)
Future at 0x8acc94c state=running
ctrl-D
Error
Antoine Pitrou pit...@free.fr added the comment:
Ok, here is a new patch with an additional test for the atexit hook. If you
don't object, I would like to start committing the test changes, and then the
code changes themselves.
--
stage: needs patch - patch review
versions: +Python
Antoine Pitrou pit...@free.fr added the comment:
Oops, test didn't work under Windows. Here is a new patch.
--
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file21361/cfpolling3.patch
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue11635
Changes by Antoine Pitrou pit...@free.fr:
Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file21360/cfpolling3.patch
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue11635
___
New submission from Antoine Pitrou pit...@free.fr:
concurrent.futures uses polling in its worker threads and processes
(with a timeout of 0.1).
It means that:
1) this prevents CPUs to enter low power states durably
2) it incurs latency when calling shutdown() on an executor (this seems to be
Changes by Daniel Stutzbach stutzb...@google.com:
--
nosy: +stutzbach
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue11635
___
___
Python-bugs-list
Antoine Pitrou pit...@free.fr added the comment:
Ok, here is a patch. Summary:
- leave a minimal amount of polling (every 600 seconds) to avoid blocking
forever if there's a bug (shouldn't happen of course, but who knows? especially
with multiprocessing)
- when wanting to wakeup a worker, put
Antoine Pitrou pit...@free.fr added the comment:
(patch is for 3.2, by the way. Perhaps this should only be fixed in default?)
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue11635
___
Brian Quinlan br...@sweetapp.com added the comment:
I would suggest that you base your patch on 3.3/default.
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue11635
___
Antoine Pitrou pit...@free.fr added the comment:
I would suggest that you base your patch on 3.3/default.
Well, since the module is new, I think it would be nice to fix such
quirks in the bugfix branch as well. So, following the recommended
workflow, I've started with a 3.2 patch.
--
19 matches
Mail list logo
