[issue47075] test_multiprocessing_spawn leaks QueueManager dangling processes

STINNER Victor added the comment: > BaseManager._finalize_manager() timeout should be configurable I proposed GH-32112 for that. -- ___ Python tracker ___ ___

[issue47075] test_multiprocessing_spawn leaks QueueManager dangling processes

Change by STINNER Victor : -- pull_requests: +30188 stage: -> patch review pull_request: https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/32112 ___ Python tracker ___ __

[issue47075] test_multiprocessing_spawn leaks QueueManager dangling processes

STINNER Victor added the comment: Recent failures. AMD64 FreeBSD Non-Debug 3.x: https://buildbot.python.org/all/#/builders/172/builds/1654 --- Warning -- Dangling processes: {} Warning -- Dangling processes: {} 1 test altered the execution environment: test_multiprocessing_spawn ---

[issue47075] test_multiprocessing_spawn leaks QueueManager dangling processes

STINNER Victor added the comment: BaseManager._finalize_manager() timeout should be configurable, the test should use the same timeout than support.wait_process() (SHORT_TIMEOUT), and maybe the default timeout should be increased? I propose to use the same timeout for the two process.join(ti

[issue47075] test_multiprocessing_spawn leaks QueueManager dangling processes

Change by STINNER Victor : -- nosy: +erlendaasland, pablogsal ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe:

[issue47075] test_multiprocessing_spawn leaks QueueManager dangling processes

New submission from STINNER Victor : Apply attached manager_timeout.patch and run the command: ./python -m test --fail-env-changed test_multiprocessing_spawn -v -m test_rapid_restart -F -j4 If you fail to reproduce the issue, replace -j4 with -j10 or use a larger number of concurrent job