[issue29454] Shutting down consumer on a remote queue

Davin Potts added the comment: My understanding of other message queueing systems is that many are motivated by speed to the point that they will permit messages to be "lost" due to specific scenarios that would be overly costly to defend against. Other message queueing systems adopt a

[issue29454] Shutting down consumer on a remote queue

Changes by Davin Potts : -- stage: -> needs patch type: behavior -> enhancement ___ Python tracker ___

[issue29454] Shutting down consumer on a remote queue

Davin Potts added the comment: My understanding is that example uses a queue.Queue() to demonstrate how to create a custom, remote service from scratch. The implementation in this simple example lacks the sophistication of multiprocessing.Queue() for handling situations such as the one

[issue29454] Shutting down consumer on a remote queue

Raymond Hettinger added the comment: > Expected: items stay in the queue until a consumer consumes it That would be my expectation as well. Davin, do you know why the example in the docs uses queue.Queue() instead of multiprocessing.Queue()? Would there be a difference? Also, I'm curious

[issue29454] Shutting down consumer on a remote queue

Rishav Kumar added the comment: I'd like to work on this issue. -- nosy: +aptrishu ___ Python tracker ___ ___

[issue29454] Shutting down consumer on a remote queue

Changes by Xiang Zhang : -- nosy: +davin type: -> behavior ___ Python tracker ___ ___

[issue29454] Shutting down consumer on a remote queue

New submission from Tom: Using code adapted from the example in the docs (https://docs.python.org/3/library/multiprocessing.html#using-a-remote-manager), if you create a remote queue server, a producer which puts items in the queue and a consumer which consumes elements from the queue. If the