Python sleep without blocking other processes - python

I am running a python script every hour and I've been using time.sleep(3600) inside of a while loop. It seems to work as needed but I am worried about it blocking new tasks. My research of this seems to be that it only blocks the current thread but I want to be 100% sure. While the hourly job shouldn't take more than 15min, if it does or if it hangs, I don't want it to block the next one that starts. This is how I've done it:
import threading
import time
def long_hourly_job():
# do some long task
pass
if __name__ == "__main__":
while True:
thr = threading.Thread(target=long_hourly_job)
thr.start()
time.sleep(3600)
Is this sufficient?
Also, the reason i am using time.sleep for this hourly job rather than a cron job is I want to do everything in code to make dockerization cleaner.

The code will work (ie: sleep does only block the calling thread), but you should be careful of some issues. Some of them have been already stated in the comments, like the possibility of time overlaps between threads. The main issue is that your code is slowly leaking resources. After creating a thread, the OS keeps some data structures even after the thread has finished running. This is necessary, for example to keep the thread's exit status until the thread's creator requires it. The function to clear these structures (conceptually equivalent to closing a file) is called join. A thread that has finished running and is not joined is termed a 'zombie thread'. The amount of memory required by these structures is very small, and your program should run for centuries for any reasonable amount of available RAM. Nevertheless, it is a good practice to join all the threads you create. A simple approach (if you know that 3600 s is more than enough time for the thread to finish) would be:
if __name__ == "__main__":
while True:
thr = threading.Thread(target=long_hourly_job)
thr.start()
thr.join(3600) # wait at most 3600 s for the thread to finish
if thr.isAlive(): # join does not return useful information
print("Ooops: the last job did not finish on time")
A better approach if you think that it is possible that sometimes 3600 s is not enough time for the thread to finish:
if __name__ == "__main__":
previous = []
while True:
thr = threading.Thread(target=long_hourly_job)
thr.start()
previous.append(thr)
time.sleep(3600)
for i in reversed(range(len(previous))):
t = previous[i]
t.join(0)
if t.isAlive():
print("Ooops: thread still running")
else:
print("Thread finished")
previous.remove(t)
I know that the print statement makes no sense: use logging instead.

Perhaps a little late. I tested the code from other answers but my main process got stuck (perhaps I'm doing something wrong?). I then tried a different approach. It's based on threading Timer class, but trying to emulate the QtCore.QTimer() behavior and features:
import threading
import time
import traceback
class Timer:
SNOOZE = 0
ONEOFF = 1
def __init__(self, timerType=SNOOZE):
self._timerType = timerType
self._keep = threading.Event()
self._timerSnooze = None
self._timerOneoff = None
class _SnoozeTimer(threading.Timer):
# This uses threading.Timer class, but consumes more CPU?!?!?!
def __init__(self, event, msec, callback, *args):
threading.Thread.__init__(self)
self.stopped = event
self.msec = msec
self.callback = callback
self.args = args
def run(self):
while not self.stopped.wait(self.msec):
self.callback(*self.args)
def start(self, msec: int, callback, *args, start_now=False) -> bool:
started = False
if msec > 0:
if self._timerType == self.SNOOZE:
if self._timerSnooze is None:
self._timerSnooze = self._SnoozeTimer(self._keep, msec / 1000, callback, *args)
self._timerSnooze.start()
if start_now:
callback(*args)
started = True
else:
if self._timerOneoff is None:
self._timerOneoff = threading.Timer(msec / 1000, callback, *args)
self._timerOneoff.start()
started = True
return started
def stop(self):
if self._timerType == self.SNOOZE:
self._keep.set()
self._timerSnooze.join()
else:
self._timerOneoff.cancel()
self._timerOneoff.join()
def is_alive(self):
if self._timerType == self.SNOOZE:
isAlive = self._timerSnooze is not None and self._timerSnooze.is_alive() and not self._keep.is_set()
else:
isAlive = self._timerOneoff is not None and self._timerOneoff.is_alive()
return isAlive
isAlive = is_alive
KEEP = True
def callback():
global KEEP
KEEP = False
print("ENDED", time.strftime("%M:%S"))
if __name__ == "__main__":
count = 0
t = Timer(timerType=Timer.ONEOFF)
t.start(5000, callback)
print("START", time.strftime("%M:%S"))
while KEEP:
if count % 10000000 == 0:
print("STILL RUNNING")
count += 1
Notice the while loop runs in a separate thread, and uses a callback function to invoke when the time is over (in your case, this callback function would be used to check if the long running process has finished).

Related

How to separately start and stop multiprocessing processes in Python?

I use a dedicated Python (3.8) library to control a motor drive via a USB port.
The Python library provided by the motor control drive manufacturers (ODrive) allows a single Python process to control one or more drives.
However, I would like to run 3 processes, each controlling 1 drive.
After researching options (I first considered virtual machines, Docker containers, and multi-threading) I began believing that the easiest way to do so would be to use multiprocessing.
My problem is that I would then need a way to manage (i.e., start, monitor, and stop independently) multiple processes. The practical reason behind it is that motors are connected to different setups. Each setup must be able to be stopped and restarted separate if malfunctioning, for instance, but other running setups should not be affected by this action.
After reading around the internet and Stack Overflow, I now understand how to create a Pool of processing, how to associate processes with processor cores, how to start a pool of processes, and queuing/joining them (the latter not being needed for me).
What I don't know is how to manage them independently.
How can I separately start/stop different processes without affecting the execution of the others?
Are there libraries to manage them (perhaps even with a GUI)?
I'd probably do something like this:
import random
import time
from multiprocessing import Process, Queue
class MotorProcess:
def __init__(self, name, com_related_params):
self.name = name
# Made up some parameters relating to communication
self._params = com_related_params
self._command_queue = Queue()
self._status_queue = Queue()
self._process = None
def start(self):
if self._process and self._process.is_alive():
return
self._process = Process(target=self.run_processing,
args=(self._command_queue, self._status_queue,
self._params))
self._process.start()
#staticmethod
def run_processing(command_queue, status_queue, params):
while True:
# Check for commands
if not command_queue.empty():
msg = command_queue.get(block=True, timeout=0.05)
if msg == "stop motor":
status_queue.put("Stopping motor")
elif msg == "exit":
return
elif msg.startswith("move"):
status_queue.put("moving motor to blah")
# TODO: msg parsing and move motor
else:
status_queue.put("unknown command")
# Update status
# TODO: query motor status
status_queue.put(f"Motor is {random.randint(0, 100)}")
time.sleep(0.5)
def is_alive(self):
if self._process and self._process.is_alive():
return True
return False
def get_status(self):
if not self.is_alive():
return ["not running"]
# Empty the queue
recent = []
while not self._status_queue.empty():
recent.append(self._status_queue.get(False))
return recent
def stop_process(self):
if not self.is_alive():
return
self._command_queue.put("exit")
# Empty the stats queue otherwise it could potentially stop
# the process from closing.
while not self._status_queue.empty():
self._status_queue.get()
self._process.join()
def send_command(self, command):
self._command_queue.put(command)
if __name__ == "__main__":
processes = [MotorProcess("1", None), MotorProcess("2", None)]
while True:
cmd = input()
if cmd == "start 1":
processes[0].start()
elif cmd == "move 1 to 100":
processes[0].send_command("move to 100")
elif cmd == "exit 1":
processes[0].stop_process()
else:
for n, p in enumerate(processes):
print(f"motor {n + 1}", end="\n\t")
print("\n\t".join(p.get_status()))
Not production ready (e.g. no exception handling, no proper command parsing, etc.) but shows the idea.
Shout if there are any problems :D
You can create multiple multriprocessing.Process instances manually like this:
def my_func(a, b):
pass
p = multiprocessing.Process(target=my_func, args=(100, 200)
p.start()
and manage them using multiprocessing primitives Queue, Event, Condition etc. Please refer to the official documentation for details: https://docs.python.org/3/library/multiprocessing.html
In the following example multiple processes are started and stopped independently. Event is used to determine when to stop a process. Queue is used for results passing from the child processes to the main process.
import multiprocessing
import queue
import random
import time
def worker_process(
process_id: int,
results_queue: multiprocessing.Queue,
to_stop: multiprocessing.Event,
):
print(f"Process {process_id} is started")
while not to_stop.is_set():
print(f"Process {process_id} is working")
time.sleep(0.5)
result = random.random()
results_queue.put((process_id, result))
print(f"Process {process_id} exited")
process_pool = []
result_queue = multiprocessing.Queue()
while True:
if random.random() < 0.3:
# staring a new process
process_id = random.randint(0, 10_000)
to_stop = multiprocessing.Event()
p = multiprocessing.Process(
target=worker_process, args=(process_id, result_queue, to_stop)
)
p.start()
process_pool.append((p, to_stop))
if random.random() < 0.2:
# closing a random process
if process_pool:
process, to_stop = process_pool.pop(
random.randint(0, len(process_pool) - 1)
)
to_stop.set()
process.join()
try:
p_id, result = result_queue.get_nowait()
print(f"Completed: process_id={p_id} result={result}")
except queue.Empty:
pass
time.sleep(1)

How to structure code to be able to launch tasks that can kill/replace each other

I have a Python program that does the following:
1) endlessly wait on com port a command character
2) on character reception, launch a new thread to execute a particular piece of code
What I would need to do if a new command is received is:
1) kill the previous thread
2) launch a new one
I read here and there that doing so is not the right way to proceed.
What would be the best way to do this knowing that I need to do this in the same process so I guess I need to use threads ...
I would suggest you two differente approaches:
if your processes are both called internally from a function, you could set a timeout on the first function.
if you are running external script, you might want to kill the process.
Let me try to be more precise in my question by adding an example of my code structure.
Suppose synchronous functionA is still running because waiting internally for a particular event, if command "c" is received, I need to stop functionA and launch functionC.
def functionA():
....
....
call a synchronous serviceA that can take several seconds even more to execute
....
....
def functionB():
....
....
call a synchronous serviceB that nearly returns immediately
....
....
def functionC():
....
....
call a synchronous serviceC
....
....
#-------------------
def launch_async_task(function):
t = threading.Thread(target=function, name="async")
t.setDaemon(True)
t.start()
#------main----------
while True:
try:
car = COM_port.read(1)
if car == "a":
launch_async_task(functionA)
elif car == "b":
launch_async_task(functionB)
elif car == "c":
launch_async_task(functionC)
May want to run the serial port in a separate thread. When it receives a byte put that byte in a queue. Have the main program loop and check the queue to decide what to do with it. From the main program you can kill the thread with join and start a new thread. You may also want to look into a thread pool to see if it is what you want.
ser = serial.Serial("COM1", 9600)
que = queue.Queue()
def read_serial(com, q):
val = com.read(1)
q.put(val)
ser_th = threading.Thread(target=read_serial, args=(ser, que))
ser_th.start()
th = None
while True:
if not que.empty():
val = que.get()
if val == b"e":
break # quit
elif val == b"a":
if th is not None:
th.join(0) # Kill the previous function
th = threading.Thread(target=functionA)
th.start()
elif val == b"b":
if th is not None:
th.join(0) # Kill the previous function
th = threading.Thread(target=functionB)
th.start()
elif val == b"c":
if th is not None:
th.join(0) # Kill the previous thread (functionA)
th = threading.Thread(target=functionC)
th.start()
try:
ser.close()
th.join(0)
except:
pass
If you are creating and joining a lot of threads you may want to just have a function that checks what command to run.
running = True
def run_options(option):
if option == 0:
print("Running Option 0")
elif option == 1:
print("Running Option 1")
else:
running = False
while running:
if not que.empty():
val = que.get()
run_options(val)
Ok, I finally used a piece of code that uses ctypes lib to provide some kind of killing thread function.
I know this is not a clean way to proceed but in my case, there are no resources shared by the threads so it shouldn't have any impact ...
If it can help, here is the piece of code that can easily be found on the net:
def terminate_thread(thread):
"""Terminates a python thread from another thread.
:param thread: a threading.Thread instance
"""
if not thread.isAlive():
return
exc = ctypes.py_object(SystemExit)
res = ctypes.pythonapi.PyThreadState_SetAsyncExc(
ctypes.c_long(thread.ident), exc)
if res == 0:
raise ValueError("nonexistent thread id")
elif res > 1:
# """if it returns a number greater than one, you're in trouble,
# and you should call it again with exc=NULL to revert the effect"""
ctypes.pythonapi.PyThreadState_SetAsyncExc(thread.ident, None)
raise SystemError("PyThreadState_SetAsyncExc failed")

How do I detect if a thread died, and then restart it?

I have an application that fires up a series of threads. Occassionally, one of these threads dies (usually due to a network problem). How can I properly detect a thread crash and restart just that thread? Here is example code:
import random
import threading
import time
class MyThread(threading.Thread):
def __init__(self, pass_value):
super(MyThread, self).__init__()
self.running = False
self.value = pass_value
def run(self):
self.running = True
while self.running:
time.sleep(0.25)
rand = random.randint(0,10)
print threading.current_thread().name, rand, self.value
if rand == 4:
raise ValueError('Returned 4!')
if __name__ == '__main__':
group1 = []
group2 = []
for g in range(4):
group1.append(MyThread(g))
group2.append(MyThread(g+20))
for m in group1:
m.start()
print "Now start second wave..."
for p in group2:
p.start()
In this example, I start 4 threads then I start 4 more threads. Each thread randomly generates an int between 0 and 10. If that int is 4, it raises an exception. Notice that I don't join the threads. I want both group1 and group2 list of threads to be running. I found that if I joined the threads it would wait until the thread terminated. My thread is supposed to be a daemon process, thus should rarely (if ever) hit the ValueError Exception this example code is showing and should be running constantly. By joining it, the next set of threads doesn't begin.
How can I detect that a specific thread died and restart just that one thread?
I have attempted the following loop right after my for p in group2 loop.
while True:
# Create a copy of our groups to iterate over,
# so that we can delete dead threads if needed
for m in group1[:]:
if not m.isAlive():
group1.remove(m)
group1.append(MyThread(1))
for m in group2[:]:
if not m.isAlive():
group2.remove(m)
group2.append(MyThread(500))
time.sleep(5.0)
I took this method from this question.
The problem with this, is that isAlive() seems to always return True, because the threads never restart.
Edit
Would it be more appropriate in this situation to use multiprocessing? I found this tutorial. Is it more appropriate to have separate processes if I am going to need to restart the process? It seems that restarting a thread is difficult.
It was mentioned in the comments that I should check is_active() against the thread. I don't see this mentioned in the documentation, but I do see the isAlive that I am currently using. As I mentioned above, though, this returns True, thus I'm never able to see that a thread as died.
I had a similar issue and stumbled across this question. I found that join takes a timeout argument, and that is_alive will return False once the thread is joined. So my audit for each thread is:
def check_thread_alive(thr):
thr.join(timeout=0.0)
return thr.is_alive()
This detects thread death for me.
You could potentially put in an a try except around where you expect it to crash (if it can be anywhere you can do it around the whole run function) and have an indicator variable which has its status.
So something like the following:
class MyThread(threading.Thread):
def __init__(self, pass_value):
super(MyThread, self).__init__()
self.running = False
self.value = pass_value
self.RUNNING = 0
self.FINISHED_OK = 1
self.STOPPED = 2
self.CRASHED = 3
self.status = self.STOPPED
def run(self):
self.running = True
self.status = self.RUNNING
while self.running:
time.sleep(0.25)
rand = random.randint(0,10)
print threading.current_thread().name, rand, self.value
try:
if rand == 4:
raise ValueError('Returned 4!')
except:
self.status = self.CRASHED
Then you can use your loop:
while True:
# Create a copy of our groups to iterate over,
# so that we can delete dead threads if needed
for m in group1[:]:
if m.status == m.CRASHED:
value = m.value
group1.remove(m)
group1.append(MyThread(value))
for m in group2[:]:
if m.status == m.CRASHED:
value = m.value
group2.remove(m)
group2.append(MyThread(value))
time.sleep(5.0)

kill a function after a certain time in windows

I've read a lot of posts about using threads, subprocesses, etc.. A lot of it seems over complicated for what I'm trying to do...
All I want to do is stop executing a function after X amount of time has elapsed.
def big_loop(bob):
x = bob
start = time.time()
while True:
print time.time()-start
This function is an endless loop that never throws any errors or exceptions, period.
I"m not sure the difference between "commands, shells, subprocesses, threads, etc.." and this function, which is why I'm having trouble manipulating subprocesses.
I found this code here, and tried it but as you can see it keeps printing after 10 seconds have elapsed:
import time
import threading
import subprocess as sub
import time
class RunCmd(threading.Thread):
def __init__(self, cmd, timeout):
threading.Thread.__init__(self)
self.cmd = cmd
self.timeout = timeout
def run(self):
self.p = sub.Popen(self.cmd)
self.p.wait()
def Run(self):
self.start()
self.join(self.timeout)
if self.is_alive():
self.p.terminate()
self.join()
def big_loop(bob):
x = bob
start = time.time()
while True:
print time.time()-start
RunCmd(big_loop('jimijojo'), 10).Run() #supposed to quit after 10 seconds, but doesn't
x = raw_input('DONEEEEEEEEEEEE')
What's a simple way this function can be killed. As you can see in my attempt above, it doesn't terminate after 20 seconds and just keeps on going...
***OH also, I've read about using signal, but I"m on windows so I can't use the alarm feature.. (python 2.7)
**assume the "infinitely running function" can't be manipulated or changed to be non-infinite, if I could change the function, well I'd just change it to be non infinite wouldn't I?
Here are some similar questions, which I haven't able to port over their code to work with my simple function:
Perhaps you can?
Python: kill or terminate subprocess when timeout
signal.alarm replacement in Windows [Python]
Ok I tried an answer I received, it works.. but how can I use it if I remove the if __name__ == "__main__": statement? When I remove this statement, the loop never ends as it did before..
import multiprocessing
import Queue
import time
def infinite_loop_function(bob):
var = bob
start = time.time()
while True:
time.sleep(1)
print time.time()-start
print 'this statement will never print'
def wrapper(queue, bob):
result = infinite_loop_function(bob)
queue.put(result)
queue.close()
#if __name__ == "__main__":
queue = multiprocessing.Queue(1) # Maximum size is 1
proc = multiprocessing.Process(target=wrapper, args=(queue, 'var'))
proc.start()
# Wait for TIMEOUT seconds
try:
timeout = 10
result = queue.get(True, timeout)
except Queue.Empty:
# Deal with lack of data somehow
result = None
finally:
proc.terminate()
print 'running other code, now that that infinite loop has been defeated!'
print 'bla bla bla'
x = raw_input('done')
Use the building blocks in the multiprocessing module:
import multiprocessing
import Queue
TIMEOUT = 5
def big_loop(bob):
import time
time.sleep(4)
return bob*2
def wrapper(queue, bob):
result = big_loop(bob)
queue.put(result)
queue.close()
def run_loop_with_timeout():
bob = 21 # Whatever sensible value you need
queue = multiprocessing.Queue(1) # Maximum size is 1
proc = multiprocessing.Process(target=wrapper, args=(queue, bob))
proc.start()
# Wait for TIMEOUT seconds
try:
result = queue.get(True, TIMEOUT)
except Queue.Empty:
# Deal with lack of data somehow
result = None
finally:
proc.terminate()
# Process data here, not in try block above, otherwise your process keeps running
print result
if __name__ == "__main__":
run_loop_with_timeout()
You could also accomplish this with a Pipe/Connection pair, but I'm not familiar with their API. Change the sleep time or TIMEOUT to check the behaviour for either case.
There is no straightforward way to kill a function after a certain amount of time without running the function in a separate process. A better approach would probably be to rewrite the function so that it returns after a specified time:
import time
def big_loop(bob, timeout):
x = bob
start = time.time()
end = start + timeout
while time.time() < end:
print time.time() - start
# Do more stuff here as needed
Can't you just return from the loop?
start = time.time()
endt = start + 30
while True:
now = time.time()
if now > endt:
return
else:
print end - start
import os,signal,time
cpid = os.fork()
if cpid == 0:
while True:
# do stuff
else:
time.sleep(10)
os.kill(cpid, signal.SIGKILL)
You can also check in the loop of a thread for an event, which is more portable and flexible as it allows other reactions than brute killing. However, this approach fails if # do stuff can take time (or even wait forever on some event).

Python Equivalent of setInterval()?

Does Python have a function similar to JavaScript's setInterval()?
I would like to have:
def set_interval(func, interval):
...
That will call func every interval time units.
This might be the correct snippet you were looking for:
import threading
def set_interval(func, sec):
def func_wrapper():
set_interval(func, sec)
func()
t = threading.Timer(sec, func_wrapper)
t.start()
return t
This is a version where you could start and stop.
It is not blocking.
There is also no glitch as execution time error is not added (important for long time execution with very short interval as audio for example)
import time, threading
StartTime=time.time()
def action() :
print('action ! -> time : {:.1f}s'.format(time.time()-StartTime))
class setInterval :
def __init__(self,interval,action) :
self.interval=interval
self.action=action
self.stopEvent=threading.Event()
thread=threading.Thread(target=self.__setInterval)
thread.start()
def __setInterval(self) :
nextTime=time.time()+self.interval
while not self.stopEvent.wait(nextTime-time.time()) :
nextTime+=self.interval
self.action()
def cancel(self) :
self.stopEvent.set()
# start action every 0.6s
inter=setInterval(0.6,action)
print('just after setInterval -> time : {:.1f}s'.format(time.time()-StartTime))
# will stop interval in 5s
t=threading.Timer(5,inter.cancel)
t.start()
Output is :
just after setInterval -> time : 0.0s
action ! -> time : 0.6s
action ! -> time : 1.2s
action ! -> time : 1.8s
action ! -> time : 2.4s
action ! -> time : 3.0s
action ! -> time : 3.6s
action ! -> time : 4.2s
action ! -> time : 4.8s
Just keep it nice and simple.
import threading
def setInterval(func,time):
e = threading.Event()
while not e.wait(time):
func()
def foo():
print "hello"
# using
setInterval(foo,5)
# output:
hello
hello
.
.
.
EDIT : This code is non-blocking
import threading
class ThreadJob(threading.Thread):
def __init__(self,callback,event,interval):
'''runs the callback function after interval seconds
:param callback: callback function to invoke
:param event: external event for controlling the update operation
:param interval: time in seconds after which are required to fire the callback
:type callback: function
:type interval: int
'''
self.callback = callback
self.event = event
self.interval = interval
super(ThreadJob,self).__init__()
def run(self):
while not self.event.wait(self.interval):
self.callback()
event = threading.Event()
def foo():
print "hello"
k = ThreadJob(foo,event,2)
k.start()
print "It is non-blocking"
Change Nailxx's answer a bit and you got the answer!
from threading import Timer
def hello():
print "hello, world"
Timer(30.0, hello).start()
Timer(30.0, hello).start() # after 30 seconds, "hello, world" will be printed
The sched module provides these abilities for general Python code. However, as its documentation suggests, if your code is multithreaded it might make more sense to use the threading.Timer class instead.
I think this is what you're after:
#timertest.py
import sched, time
def dostuff():
print "stuff is being done!"
s.enter(3, 1, dostuff, ())
s = sched.scheduler(time.time, time.sleep)
s.enter(3, 1, dostuff, ())
s.run()
If you add another entry to the scheduler at the end of the repeating method, it'll just keep going.
I use sched to create setInterval function gist
import functools
import sched, time
s = sched.scheduler(time.time, time.sleep)
def setInterval(sec):
def decorator(func):
#functools.wraps(func)
def wrapper(*argv, **kw):
setInterval(sec)(func)
func(*argv, **kw)
s.enter(sec, 1, wrapper, ())
return wrapper
s.run()
return decorator
#setInterval(sec=3)
def testInterval():
print ("test Interval ")
testInterval()
Simple setInterval utils
from threading import Timer
def setInterval(timer, task):
isStop = task()
if not isStop:
Timer(timer, setInterval, [timer, task]).start()
def hello():
print "do something"
return False # return True if you want to stop
if __name__ == "__main__":
setInterval(2.0, hello) # every 2 seconds, "do something" will be printed
The above method didn't quite do it for me as I needed to be able to cancel the interval. I turned the function into a class and came up with the following:
class setInterval():
def __init__(self, func, sec):
def func_wrapper():
self.t = threading.Timer(sec, func_wrapper)
self.t.start()
func()
self.t = threading.Timer(sec, func_wrapper)
self.t.start()
def cancel(self):
self.t.cancel()
Most of the answers above do not shut down the Thread properly. While using Jupyter notebook I noticed that when an explicit interrupt was sent, the threads were still running and worse, they would keep multiplying starting at 1 thread running,2, 4 etc. My method below is based on the answer by #doom but cleanly handles interrupts by running an infinite loop in the Main thread to listen for SIGINT and SIGTERM events
No drift
Cancelable
Handles SIGINT and SIGTERM very well
Doesnt make a new thread for every run
Feel free to suggest improvements
import time
import threading
import signal
# Record the time for the purposes of demonstration
start_time=time.time()
class ProgramKilled(Exception):
"""
An instance of this custom exception class will be thrown everytime we get an SIGTERM or SIGINT
"""
pass
# Raise the custom exception whenever SIGINT or SIGTERM is triggered
def signal_handler(signum, frame):
raise ProgramKilled
# This function serves as the callback triggered on every run of our IntervalThread
def action() :
print('action ! -> time : {:.1f}s'.format(time.time()-start_time))
# https://stackoverflow.com/questions/2697039/python-equivalent-of-setinterval
class IntervalThread(threading.Thread) :
def __init__(self,interval,action, *args, **kwargs) :
super(IntervalThread, self).__init__()
self.interval=interval
self.action=action
self.stopEvent=threading.Event()
self.start()
def run(self) :
nextTime=time.time()+self.interval
while not self.stopEvent.wait(nextTime-time.time()) :
nextTime+=self.interval
self.action()
def cancel(self) :
self.stopEvent.set()
def main():
# Handle SIGINT and SIFTERM with the help of the callback function
signal.signal(signal.SIGTERM, signal_handler)
signal.signal(signal.SIGINT, signal_handler)
# start action every 1s
inter=IntervalThread(1,action)
print('just after setInterval -> time : {:.1f}s'.format(time.time()-start_time))
# will stop interval in 500s
t=threading.Timer(500,inter.cancel)
t.start()
# https://www.g-loaded.eu/2016/11/24/how-to-terminate-running-python-threads-using-signals/
while True:
try:
time.sleep(1)
except ProgramKilled:
print("Program killed: running cleanup code")
inter.cancel()
break
if __name__ == "__main__":
main()
In the above solutions if a situation arises where program is shutdown, there is no guarantee that it will shutdown gracefully,Its always recommended to shut a program via a soft kill, neither did most of them have a function to stop I found a nice article on medium written by Sankalp which solves both of these issues (run periodic tasks in python) refer the attached link to get a deeper insight.
In the below sample a library named signal is used to track the kill is soft kill or a hard kill
import threading, time, signal
from datetime import timedelta
WAIT_TIME_SECONDS = 1
class ProgramKilled(Exception):
pass
def foo():
print time.ctime()
def signal_handler(signum, frame):
raise ProgramKilled
class Job(threading.Thread):
def __init__(self, interval, execute, *args, **kwargs):
threading.Thread.__init__(self)
self.daemon = False
self.stopped = threading.Event()
self.interval = interval
self.execute = execute
self.args = args
self.kwargs = kwargs
def stop(self):
self.stopped.set()
self.join()
def run(self):
while not self.stopped.wait(self.interval.total_seconds()):
self.execute(*self.args, **self.kwargs)
if __name__ == "__main__":
signal.signal(signal.SIGTERM, signal_handler)
signal.signal(signal.SIGINT, signal_handler)
job = Job(interval=timedelta(seconds=WAIT_TIME_SECONDS), execute=foo)
job.start()
while True:
try:
time.sleep(1)
except ProgramKilled:
print "Program killed: running cleanup code"
job.stop()
break
#output
#Tue Oct 16 17:47:51 2018
#Tue Oct 16 17:47:52 2018
#Tue Oct 16 17:47:53 2018
#^CProgram killed: running cleanup code
setInterval should be run on multiple thread, and not freeze the task when it running loop.
Here is my RUNTIME package that support multithread feature:
setTimeout(F,ms) : timming to fire function in independence thread.
delayF(F,ms) : similar setTimeout(F,ms).
setInterval(F,ms) : asynchronous loop
.pause, .resume : pause and resume the interval
clearInterval(interval) : clear the interval
It's short and simple. Note that python need lambda if you input direct the function, but lambda is not support command block, so you should define the function content before put it in the setInterval.
### DEMO PYTHON MULTITHREAD ASYNCHRONOUS LOOP ###
import time;
import threading;
import random;
def delay(ms):time.sleep(ms/1000); # Controil while speed
def setTimeout(R,delayMS):
t=threading.Timer(delayMS/1000,R)
t.start();
return t;
def delayF(R,delayMS):
t=threading.Timer(delayMS/1000,R)
t.start();
return t;
class THREAD:
def __init__(this):
this.R_onRun=None;
this.thread=None;
def run(this):
this.thread=threading.Thread(target=this.R_onRun);
this.thread.start();
def isRun(this): return this.thread.isAlive();
class setInterval :
def __init__(this,R_onRun,msInterval) :
this.ms=msInterval;
this.R_onRun=R_onRun;
this.kStop=False;
this.thread=THREAD();
this.thread.R_onRun=this.Clock;
this.thread.run();
def Clock(this) :
while not this.kStop :
this.R_onRun();
delay(this.ms);
def pause(this) :
this.kStop=True;
def stop(this) :
this.kStop=True;
def resume(this) :
if (this.kStop) :
this.kStop=False;
this.thread.run();
def clearInterval(Timer): Timer.stop();
# EXAMPLE
def p():print(random.random());
tm=setInterval(p,20);
tm2=setInterval(lambda:print("AAAAA"),20);
delayF(tm.pause,1000);
delayF(tm.resume,2000);
delayF(lambda:clearInterval(tm),3000);
Save to file .py and run it. You will see it print both random number and string "AAAAA". The print number thread will pause printing after 1 second and resume print again for 1 second then stop, while the print string keep printing text not corrupt.
In case you use OpenCV for graphic animation with those setInterval for boost animate speed, you must have 1 main thread to apply waitKey, otherwise the window will freeze no matter how slow delay or you applied waitKey in sub thread:
def p:... # Your drawing task
setInterval(p,1); # Subthread1 running draw
setInterval(p,1); # Subthread2 running draw
setInterval(p,1); # Subthread3 running draw
while True: cv2.waitKey(10); # Main thread which waitKey have effect
You can also try out this method:
import time
while True:
time.sleep(5)
print("5 seconds has passed")
So it will print "5 seconds has passed" every 5 seconds.
The function sleep() suspends execution for the given number of seconds. The argument may be a floating point number to indicate a more precise sleep time.
Recently, I have the same issue as you. And I find these soluation:
1. you can use the library: threading.Time(this have introduction above)
2. you can use the library: sched(this have introduction above too)
3. you can use the library: Advanced Python Scheduler(Recommend)
Some answers above that uses func_wrapper and threading.Timer indeed work, except that it spawns a new thread every time an interval is called, which is causing memory problems.
The basic example below roughly implemented a similar mechanism by putting interval on a separate thread. It sleeps at the given interval. Before jumping into code, here are some of the limitations that you need to be aware of:
JavaScript is single threaded, so when the function inside setInterval is fired, nothing else will be working at the same time (excluding worker thread, but let's talk general use case of setInterval. Therefore, threading is safe. But here in this implementation, you may encounter race conditions unless using a threading.rLock.
The implementation below uses time.sleep to simulate intervals, but adding the execution time of func, the total time for this interval may be greater than what you expect. So depending on use cases, you may want to "sleep less" (minus time taken for calling func)
I only roughly tested this, and you should definitely not use global variables the way I did, feel free to tweak it so that it fits in your system.
Enough talking, here is the code:
# Python 2.7
import threading
import time
class Interval(object):
def __init__(self):
self.daemon_alive = True
self.thread = None # keep a reference to the thread so that we can "join"
def ticktock(self, interval, func):
while self.daemon_alive:
time.sleep(interval)
func()
num = 0
def print_num():
global num
num += 1
print 'num + 1 = ', num
def print_negative_num():
global num
print '-num = ', num * -1
intervals = {} # keep track of intervals
g_id_counter = 0 # roughly generate ids for intervals
def set_interval(interval, func):
global g_id_counter
interval_obj = Interval()
# Put this interval on a new thread
t = threading.Thread(target=interval_obj.ticktock, args=(interval, func))
t.setDaemon(True)
interval_obj.thread = t
t.start()
# Register this interval so that we can clear it later
# using roughly generated id
interval_id = g_id_counter
g_id_counter += 1
intervals[interval_id] = interval_obj
# return interval id like it does in JavaScript
return interval_id
def clear_interval(interval_id):
# terminate this interval's while loop
intervals[interval_id].daemon_alive = False
# kill the thread
intervals[interval_id].thread.join()
# pop out the interval from registry for reusing
intervals.pop(interval_id)
if __name__ == '__main__':
num_interval = set_interval(1, print_num)
neg_interval = set_interval(3, print_negative_num)
time.sleep(10) # Sleep 10 seconds on main thread to let interval run
clear_interval(num_interval)
clear_interval(neg_interval)
print "- Are intervals all cleared?"
time.sleep(3) # check if both intervals are stopped (not printing)
print "- Yup, time to get beers"
Expected output:
num + 1 = 1
num + 1 = 2
-num = -2
num + 1 = 3
num + 1 = 4
num + 1 = 5
-num = -5
num + 1 = 6
num + 1 = 7
num + 1 = 8
-num = -8
num + 1 = 9
num + 1 = 10
-num = -10
Are intervals all cleared?
Yup, time to get beers
My Python 3 module jsinterval.py will be helpful! Here it is:
"""
Threaded intervals and timeouts from JavaScript
"""
import threading, sys
__all__ = ['TIMEOUTS', 'INTERVALS', 'setInterval', 'clearInterval', 'setTimeout', 'clearTimeout']
TIMEOUTS = {}
INTERVALS = {}
last_timeout_id = 0
last_interval_id = 0
class Timeout:
"""Class for all timeouts."""
def __init__(self, func, timeout):
global last_timeout_id
last_timeout_id += 1
self.timeout_id = last_timeout_id
TIMEOUTS[str(self.timeout_id)] = self
self.func = func
self.timeout = timeout
self.threadname = 'Timeout #%s' %self.timeout_id
def run(self):
func = self.func
delx = self.__del__
def func_wrapper():
func()
delx()
self.t = threading.Timer(self.timeout/1000, func_wrapper)
self.t.name = self.threadname
self.t.start()
def __repr__(self):
return '<JS Timeout set for %s seconds, launching function %s on timeout reached>' %(self.timeout, repr(self.func))
def __del__(self):
self.t.cancel()
class Interval:
"""Class for all intervals."""
def __init__(self, func, interval):
global last_interval_id
self.interval_id = last_interval_id
INTERVALS[str(self.interval_id)] = self
last_interval_id += 1
self.func = func
self.interval = interval
self.threadname = 'Interval #%s' %self.interval_id
def run(self):
func = self.func
interval = self.interval
def func_wrapper():
timeout = Timeout(func_wrapper, interval)
self.timeout = timeout
timeout.run()
func()
self.t = threading.Timer(self.interval/1000, func_wrapper)
self.t.name = self.threadname
self.t.run()
def __repr__(self):
return '<JS Interval, repeating function %s with interval %s>' %(repr(self.func), self.interval)
def __del__(self):
self.timeout.__del__()
def setInterval(func, interval):
"""
Create a JS Interval: func is the function to repeat, interval is the interval (in ms)
of executing the function.
"""
temp = Interval(func, interval)
temp.run()
idx = int(temp.interval_id)
del temp
return idx
def clearInterval(interval_id):
try:
INTERVALS[str(interval_id)].__del__()
del INTERVALS[str(interval_id)]
except KeyError:
sys.stderr.write('No such interval "Interval #%s"\n' %interval_id)
def setTimeout(func, timeout):
"""
Create a JS Timeout: func is the function to timeout, timeout is the timeout (in ms)
of executing the function.
"""
temp = Timeout(func, timeout)
temp.run()
idx = int(temp.timeout_id)
del temp
return idx
def clearTimeout(timeout_id):
try:
TIMEOUTS[str(timeout_id)].__del__()
del TIMEOUTS[str(timeout_id)]
except KeyError:
sys.stderr.write('No such timeout "Timeout #%s"\n' %timeout_id)
CODE EDIT:
Fixed the memory leak (spotted by #benjaminz). Now ALL threads are cleaned up upon end. Why does this leak happen? It happens because of the implicit (or even explicit) references. In my case, TIMEOUTS and INTERVALS. Timeouts self-clean automatically (after this patch) because they use function wrapper which calls the function and then self-kills. But how does this happen? Objects can't be deleted from memory unless all references are deleted too or gc module is used. Explaining: there's no way to create (in my code) unwanted references to timeouts/intervals. They have only ONE referrer: the TIMEOUTS/INTERVALS dicts. And, when interrupted or finished (only timeouts can finish uninterrupted) they delete the only existing reference to themselves: their corresponding dict element. Classes are perfectly encapsulated using __all__, so no space for memory leaks.
Here is a low time drift solution that uses a thread to periodically signal an Event object. The thread's run() does almost nothing while waiting for a timeout; hence the low time drift.
# Example of low drift (time) periodic execution of a function.
import threading
import time
# Thread that sets 'flag' after 'timeout'
class timerThread (threading.Thread):
def __init__(self , timeout , flag):
threading.Thread.__init__(self)
self.timeout = timeout
self.stopFlag = False
self.event = threading.Event()
self.flag = flag
# Low drift run(); there is only the 'if'
# and 'set' methods between waits.
def run(self):
while not self.event.wait(self.timeout):
if self.stopFlag:
break
self.flag.set()
def stop(self):
stopFlag = True
self.event.set()
# Data.
printCnt = 0
# Flag to print.
printFlag = threading.Event()
# Create and start the timer thread.
printThread = timerThread(3 , printFlag)
printThread.start()
# Loop to wait for flag and print time.
while True:
global printCnt
# Wait for flag.
printFlag.wait()
# Flag must be manually cleared.
printFlag.clear()
print(time.time())
printCnt += 1
if printCnt == 3:
break;
# Stop the thread and exit.
printThread.stop()
printThread.join()
print('Done')
fall asleep until the next interval of seconds length starts: (not concurrent)
def sleep_until_next_interval(self, seconds):
now = time.time()
fall_asleep = seconds - now % seconds
time.sleep(fall_asleep)
while True:
sleep_until_next_interval(10) # 10 seconds - worktime
# work here
simple and no drift.
I have written my code to make a very very flexible setInterval in python. Here you are:
import threading
class AlreadyRunning(Exception):
pass
class IntervalNotValid(Exception):
pass
class setInterval():
def __init__(this, func=None, sec=None, args=[]):
this.running = False
this.func = func # the function to be run
this.sec = sec # interval in second
this.Return = None # The returned data
this.args = args
this.runOnce = None # asociated with run_once() method
this.runOnceArgs = None # asociated with run_once() method
if (func is not None and sec is not None):
this.running = True
if (not callable(func)):
raise TypeError("non-callable object is given")
if (not isinstance(sec, int) and not isinstance(sec, float)):
raise TypeError("A non-numeric object is given")
this.TIMER = threading.Timer(this.sec, this.loop)
this.TIMER.start()
def start(this):
if (not this.running):
if (not this.isValid()):
raise IntervalNotValid("The function and/or the " +
"interval hasn't provided or invalid.")
this.running = True
this.TIMER = threading.Timer(this.sec, this.loop)
this.TIMER.start()
else:
raise AlreadyRunning("Tried to run an already run interval")
def stop(this):
this.running = False
def isValid(this):
if (not callable(this.func)):
return False
cond1 = not isinstance(this.sec, int)
cond2 = not isinstance(this.sec, float)
if (cond1 and cond2):
return False
return True
def loop(this):
if (this.running):
this.TIMER = threading.Timer(this.sec, this.loop)
this.TIMER.start()
function_, Args_ = this.func, this.args
if (this.runOnce is not None): # someone has provide the run_once
runOnce, this.runOnce = this.runOnce, None
result = runOnce(*(this.runOnceArgs))
this.runOnceArgs = None
# if and only if the result is False. not accept "None"
# nor zero.
if (result is False):
return # cancel the interval right now
this.Return = function_(*Args_)
def change_interval(this, sec):
cond1 = not isinstance(sec, int)
cond2 = not isinstance(sec, float)
if (cond1 and cond2):
raise TypeError("A non-numeric object is given")
# prevent error when providing interval to a blueprint
if (this.running):
this.TIMER.cancel()
this.sec = sec
# prevent error when providing interval to a blueprint
# if the function hasn't provided yet
if (this.running):
this.TIMER = threading.Timer(this.sec, this.loop)
this.TIMER.start()
def change_next_interval(this, sec):
if (not isinstance(sec, int) and not isinstance(sec, float)):
raise TypeError("A non-numeric object is given")
this.sec = sec
def change_func(this, func, args=[]):
if (not callable(func)):
raise TypeError("non-callable object is given")
this.func = func
this.args = args
def run_once(this, func, args=[]):
this.runOnce = func
this.runOnceArgs = args
def get_return(this):
return this.Return
You can get many features and flexibility. Running this code won't freeze your code, you can change the interval at run time, you can change the function at run time, you can pass arguments, you can get the returned object from your function, and many more. You can make your tricks too!
here's a very simple and basic example to use it:
import time
def interval(name="world"):
print(f"Hello {name}!")
# function named interval will be called every two seconds
# output: "Hello world!"
interval1 = setInterval(interval, 2)
# function named interval will be called every 1.5 seconds
# output: "Hello Jane!"
interval2 = setInterval(interval, 1.5, ["Jane"])
time.sleep(5) #stop all intervals after 5 seconds
interval1.stop()
interval2.stop()
Check out my Github project to see more examples and follow next updates :D
https://github.com/Hzzkygcs/setInterval-python
Here's something easy peazy:
import time
delay = 10 # Seconds
def setInterval():
print('I print in intervals!')
time.sleep(delay)
setInterval()
Things work differently in Python: you need to either sleep() (if you want to block the current thread) or start a new thread. See http://docs.python.org/library/threading.html
From Python Documentation:
from threading import Timer
def hello():
print "hello, world"
t = Timer(30.0, hello)
t.start() # after 30 seconds, "hello, world" will be printed

Categories