Re: asyncio question

On Tue, Nov 3, 2020 at 3:27 AM Frank Millman wrote: > It works, and it does look neater. But I want to start some background > tasks before starting the server, and cancel them on Ctrl+C. > > Using the 'old' method, I can wrap 'loop.run_forever()' in a > try/except/finally, check for

asyncio question

Hi all My app runs an HTTP server using asyncio. A lot of the code dates back to Python 3.4, and I am trying to bring it up to date. There is one aspect I do not understand. The 'old' way looks like this - import asyncio def main(): loop = asyncio.get_event_loop()

Re: Asyncio question (rmlibre)

On 2020-02-28 1:37 AM, rmli...@riseup.net wrote: > What resources are you trying to conserve? > > If you want to try conserving time, you shouldn't have to worry about > starting too many background tasks. That's because asyncio code was > designed to be extremely time efficient at handling

Re: Asyncio question (rmlibre)

What resources are you trying to conserve? If you want to try conserving time, you shouldn't have to worry about starting too many background tasks. That's because asyncio code was designed to be extremely time efficient at handling large numbers of concurrent async tasks. For your

Re: Asyncio question

On 2020-02-21 11:13 PM, Greg Ewing wrote: On 21/02/20 7:59 pm, Frank Millman wrote: My first attempt was to create a background task for each session which runs for the life-time of the session, and 'awaits' its queue. It works, but I was concerned about having a lot a background tasks active

Re: Asyncio question

On 21/02/20 7:59 pm, Frank Millman wrote: My first attempt was to create a background task for each session which runs for the life-time of the session, and 'awaits' its queue. It works, but I was concerned about having a lot a background tasks active at the same time. The whole point of

Asyncio question

Hi all I use asyncio in my project, and it works very well without my having to understand what goes on under the hood. It is a multi-user client/server system, and I want it to scale to many concurrent users. I have a situation where I have to decide between two approaches, and I want to

RE: asyncio Question

> -Original Message- > From: Python-list bounces+jcasale=activenetwerx@python.org> On Behalf Of Simon > Connah > Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2019 3:03 AM > To: Python > Subject: asyncio Question > > Hi, > > Hopefully this isn't a stupid question.

asyncio Question

Hi, Hopefully this isn't a stupid question. For the record I am using Python 3.7 on Ubuntu Linux. I've decided to use asyncio to write a TCP network server using Streams and asyncio.start_server(). I can handle that part of it without many problems as the documentation is pretty good. I

Re: asyncio question

"Ian Kelly" wrote in message news:CALwzid=vdczAH18mHKaL7ryvDUB=7_y-JVUrTkRZ=gkz66p...@mail.gmail.com... On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 6:15 AM, Frank Millman wrote: > The client uses AJAX to send messages to the server. It sends the > message > and continues processing, while a

Re: asyncio question

On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 6:15 AM, Frank Millman wrote: > The client uses AJAX to send messages to the server. It sends the message > and continues processing, while a background task waits for the response and > handles it appropriately. As a result, the client can send a

asyncio question

Hi all I had a problem with asyncio - not a programming problem, but one with organising my code to achieve a given result. I have come up with a solution, but thought I would mention it here to see if there is a better approach. I am using asyncio.start_server() to run a simple HTTP

asyncio question

I have a portion of code I need to speed up, there are 3 api calls to an external system where the first enumerates a large collection of objects I then loop through and perform two additional api calls each. The first call is instant, the second and third per object are very slow. Currently