On 22/11/2013 03:57, John Ladasky wrote:
...Richard submits his "hack" (his description) to Python 3.4 which pickles and
passes the string. When time permits, I'll try it out. Or maybe I'll wait, since Python
3.4.0 is still in alpha.
FTR beta 1 is due this Saturday 24/11/2013.
--
Python
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 2:57 PM, John Ladasky
wrote:
> or, for that matter, why data needs to be pickled to pass it between
> processes.
Oh, that part's easy. Let's leave the multiprocessing module out of it
for the moment; imagine you spin up two completely separate instances
of Python. Create
On Thursday, November 21, 2013 2:32:08 PM UTC-8, Ethan Furman wrote:
> Check out bugs.python.org. Search for multiprocessing and tracebacks to see
> if anything is already there; if not, create a new issue.
And on Thursday, November 21, 2013 2:37:13 PM UTC-8, Terry Reedy wrote:
> 1. Use 3.3.3
On 11/21/2013 12:01 PM, John Ladasky wrote:
This is a case where you need to dig into the code (or maybe docs) a bit
File ".../evaluate.py", line 81, in evaluate
> result = pool.map(evaluate, bundles) File
"/usr/lib/python3.3/multiprocessing/pool.py", line 228, in map
> return self._map_
On 11/21/2013 01:49 PM, John Ladasky wrote:
So now, for anyone who is still reading this: is it your
opinion that the traceback that I obtained through
multiprocessing.pool._map_async().get() SHOULD have allowed
me to see what the ultimate cause of the exception was?
It would certainly be ni
Followup:
I didn't need to go as far as Chris Angelico's second suggestion. I haven't
looked at certain parts of my own code for a while, but it turns out that I
wrote it REASONABLY logically...
My evaluate() calls another function through pool.map_async() -- _evaluate(),
which actually proce
On Thursday, November 21, 2013 12:53:07 PM UTC-8, Chris Angelico wrote:
> What you could try is
Suggestion 1:
> printing out the __cause__ and __context__ of
> the exception, to see if there's anything useful in them;
Suggestion 2:
> if there's
> nothing, the next thing to try would be some
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 5:25 AM, John Ladasky
wrote:
> On Thursday, November 21, 2013 9:24:33 AM UTC-8, Chris Angelico wrote:
>
>> Hmm. This looks like a possible need for the 'raise from' syntax.
>
> Thank you, Chris, that made me feel like a REAL Python programmer -- I just
> did some reading,
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 4:01 AM, John Ladasky
wrote:
> Here is the end of the traceback, starting with the last line of my code:
> "result = pool.map(evaluate, bundles)". After that, I'm into Python itself.
>
> File ".../evaluate.py", line 81, in evaluate
> result = pool.map(evaluate, bund
On Thursday, November 21, 2013 9:24:33 AM UTC-8, Chris Angelico wrote:
> Hmm. This looks like a possible need for the 'raise from' syntax.
Thank you, Chris, that made me feel like a REAL Python programmer -- I just did
some reading, and the "raise from" feature was not implemented until Python
Hi folks,
Somewhat over a year ago, I struggled with implementing a routine using
multiprocessing.Pool and numpy. I eventually succeeded, but I remember finding
it very hard to debug. Now I have managed to provoke an error from that
routine again, and once again, I'm struggling.
Here is the
11 matches
Mail list logo
