asyncio.get_event_loop() fails when following asyncio.run() - python

I'm trying to find a solution to call async function in a Synchronous context.
And following is my references:
Python call callback after async function is done
When using asyncio, how do you allow all running tasks to finish before shutting down the event loop
https://docs.python.org/zh-cn/3/library/asyncio-task.html
RuntimeError: This event loop is already running in python
call async function in main function
But I find that, asyncio.get_event_loop() fails when following asyncio.run(), here is my code to reproduce this issue:
import asyncio
async def asyncfunction(n):
print(f'before sleep in asyncfunction({ n })')
await asyncio.sleep(1)
print(f'after sleep in asyncfunction({ n })')
return f'result of asyncfunction({ n })'
def callback(r):
print(f'inside callback, got: {r}')
r0 = asyncio.run(asyncfunction(0)) # cause following asyncio.get_event_loop() fail.
callback(r0)
print('sync code following asyncio.run(0)')
r1 = asyncio.run(asyncfunction(1)) # but following asyncio.run() still works.
callback(r1)
print('sync code following asyncio.run(1)')
async def wrapper(n):
r = await asyncfunction(n)
callback(r)
asyncio.get_event_loop().create_task(wrapper(2)) #fail if there is asyncio.run() before
print('sync code following loop.create_task(2)')
#RuntimeError: There is no current event loop in thread 'MainThread'.
asyncio.get_event_loop().create_task(wrapper(3)) #the second call works if there is no asyncio.run() before
print('sync code following loop.create_task(3)')
# main
_all = asyncio.gather(*asyncio.all_tasks(asyncio.get_event_loop()))
asyncio.get_event_loop().run_until_complete(_all)
I think it might because that the event loop is "consumed" by something somehow, and asyncio.set_event_loop(asyncio.new_event_loop()) might be a workaround, but I'm not sure whether that is an expected usage for end-user to set event loop mannually. And I'm also wondering why and how everything happens here.
After read some of the source code of asyncio.run. I can know why this happens.
But I'm still wondering what is the expected way to call async function in a Synchronous context ?
It seems that the following code works (set a new event loop after each asyncio.run() call) :
asyncio.run(asyncfunction())
asyncio.set_event_loop(asyncio.new_event_loop())
but that is somehow weird, and doesn't seems to be the expected way.

When you call asyncio.run it creates a new event loop each time you call it. That event loop is subsequently destroyed when asyncio.run finishes. So in your code example after your second asyncio.run finishes there is no event loop at all, the two you've previously created don't exist anymore. asyncio.get_event_loop will normally create a new event loop for you unless set_event_loop was previously called, which asyncio.run does do (which explains why if you remove asyncio.run things work). To fix your code, you should create a new event loop and just use that instead of calling get_event_loop, bear in mind that this is a third loop and that may not be what you want.
import asyncio
async def asyncfunction(n):
print(f'before sleep in asyncfunction({ n })')
await asyncio.sleep(1)
print(f'after sleep in asyncfunction({ n })')
return f'result of asyncfunction({ n })'
def callback(r):
print(f'inside callback, got: {r}')
r0 = asyncio.run(asyncfunction(0))
callback(r0)
print('sync code following asyncio.run(0)')
r1 = asyncio.run(asyncfunction(1))
callback(r1)
print('sync code following asyncio.run(1)')
async def wrapper(n):
r = await asyncfunction(n)
callback(r)
loop = asyncio.new_event_loop()
loop.create_task(wrapper(2))
print('sync code following loop.create_task(2)')
loop.create_task(wrapper(3))
print('sync code following loop.create_task(3)')
# main
_all = asyncio.gather(*asyncio.all_tasks(loop))
loop.run_until_complete(_all)

Related

How to run a blocking task asynchronously with ProcessPoolExecutor and asyncio?

Im trying to run a blocking task asynchronously with ProcessPoolExecutor (It works with ThreadPoolExecutor but I need ProcessPoolExecutor for CPU-bound task). Here is my code :
import asyncio
import time
from concurrent.futures import ProcessPoolExecutor
async def run_in_thread(task, *args):
with ProcessPoolExecutor() as process_pool:
loop = asyncio.get_event_loop()
result = await loop.run_in_executor(process_pool, task, *args)
return result
async def main_task():
while True:
await asyncio.sleep(1)
print("ticker")
async def main():
asyncio.create_task(main_task())
global blocking_task
def blocking_task():
time.sleep(5)
print("blocking task done!")
await run_in_thread(blocking_task)
if __name__ == "__main__":
asyncio.run(main())
And I get this error :
result = await loop.run_in_executor(process_pool, task, *args)
concurrent.futures.process.BrokenProcessPool: A process in the process pool was terminated abruptly while the future was running or pending.
I don't understand where is the issue, can someone please help me?
I'd also like to understand why it works with ThreadPoolExecutor but not ProcessPoolExecutor
I was expecting the code to print :
ticker
ticker
ticker
ticker
ticker
blocking task done!
Move the definition of blocking_task to the outer level of the module. As the script stands this function is invisible to other Processes. The code of the function isn't sent directly to the other Process, only its name. The other Process performs its own separate import of the script but the name isn't defined at the top level.
It's the same logic as if you tried to import this script into another script. Let's say this script is in a file named foo.py. After you do import foo, there is no function named foo.blocking_task so you would be unable to call it.
This is a little bit more clear if you looked at the whole traceback, instead of just the last line.
Incidentally, using the global statement in front of the function definition isn't the same thing as moving the definition to the top level. In your script the name blocking_task does not exist at module level until the main() function actually runs (which the secondary Process never does). In the working script below, the name blocking_task exists as soon as the module is imported.
import asyncio
import time
from concurrent.futures import ProcessPoolExecutor
async def run_in_thread(task, *args):
with ProcessPoolExecutor() as process_pool:
loop = asyncio.get_event_loop()
result = await loop.run_in_executor(process_pool, task, *args)
return result
async def main_task():
while True:
await asyncio.sleep(1)
print("ticker")
def blocking_task():
time.sleep(5)
print("blocking task done!")
async def main():
asyncio.create_task(main_task())
await run_in_thread(blocking_task)
if __name__ == "__main__":
asyncio.run(main())
This prints exactly what you were expecting.

Asyncio.sleep causes script to End Immediately

In my simple asyncio Python program below, bar_loop is supposed to run continuously with a 1 second delay between loops.
Things run as expected when we have simply
async def bar_loop(self):
while True:
print('bar')
However, when we add a asyncio.sleep(1), the loop will end instead of looping.
async def bar_loop(self):
while True:
print('bar')
await asyncio.sleep(1)
Why does asyncio.sleep() cause bar_loop to exit immediately? How can we let it loop with a 1 sec delay?
Full Example:
import asyncio
from typing import Optional
class Foo:
def __init__(self):
self.bar_loop_task: Optional[asyncio.Task] = None
async def start(self):
self.bar_loop_task = asyncio.create_task(self.bar_loop())
async def stop(self):
if self.bar_loop_task is not None:
self.bar_loop_task.cancel()
async def bar_loop(self):
while True:
print('bar')
await asyncio.sleep(1)
if __name__ == '__main__':
try:
foo = Foo()
asyncio.run(foo.start())
except KeyboardInterrupt:
asyncio.run(foo.stop())
Using Python 3.9.5 on Ubuntu 20.04.
This behavior has nothing to do with calling asyncio.sleep, but with the expected behavior of creating a task and doing nothing else.
Tasks will run in parallel in the the asyncio loop, while other code that uses just coroutine and await expressions can be thought as if run in a linear pattern - however, as the are "out of the way" of the - let's call it "visible path of execution", they also won't prevent that flow.
In this case, your program simply reaches the end of the start method, with nothing left being "awaited", the asyncio loop simply finishes its execution.
If you have no explicit code to run in parallel to bar_loop, just await for the task. Change your start method to read:
async def start(self):
self.bar_loop_task = asyncio.create_task(self.bar_loop())
try:
await self.bar_loop_task
except XXX:
# handle excptions that might have taken place inside the task

await does not return the value of a future with the value set in a thread

This code should print "hi" 3 times, but it doesn't always print.
I made a gif that shows the code being executed:
from asyncio import get_event_loop, wait_for, new_event_loop
from threading import Thread
class A:
def __init__(self):
self.fut = None
def start(self):
"""
Expects a future to be created and puts "hi" as a result
"""
async def foo():
while True:
if self.fut:
self.fut.set_result('hi')
self.fut = None
new_event_loop().run_until_complete(foo())
async def make(self):
"""
Create a future and print your result when it runs out
"""
future = get_event_loop().create_future()
self.fut = future
print(await future)
a = A()
Thread(target=a.start).start()
for _ in range(3):
get_event_loop().run_until_complete(a.make())
This is caused by await future, because when I change
print(await future)
by
while not future.done():
pass
print(future.result())
the code always prints "hi" 3 times.
Is there anything in my code that causes this problem in await future?
Asyncio functions are not thread-safe, except where explicitly noted. For set_result to work from another thread, you'd need to call it through call_soon_threadsafe.
But in your case this wouldn't work because A.start creates a different event loop than the one the main thread executes. This creates issues because the futures created in one loop cannot be awaited in another one. Because of this, and also because there is just no need to create multiple event loops, you should pass the event loop instance to A.start and use it for your async needs.
But - when using the event loop from the main thread, A.start cannot call run_until_complete() because that would try to run an already running event loop. Instead, it must call asyncio.run_coroutine_threadsafe to submit the coroutine to the event loop running in the main thread. This will return a concurrent.futures.Future (not to be confused with an asyncio Future) whose result() method can be used to wait for it to execute and propagate the result or exception, just like run_until_complete() would have done. Since foo will now run in the same thread as the event loop, it can just call set_result without call_soon_threadsafe.
One final problem is that foo contains an infinite loop that doesn't await anything, which blocks the event loop. (Remember that asyncio is based on cooperative multitasking, and a coroutine that spins without awaiting doesn't cooperate.) To fix that, you can have foo monitor an event that gets triggered when a new future is available.
Applying the above to your code can look like this, which prints "hi" three times as desired:
import asyncio
from asyncio import get_event_loop
from threading import Thread
class A:
def __init__(self):
self.fut = None
self.have_fut = asyncio.Event()
def start(self, loop):
async def foo():
while True:
await self.have_fut.wait()
self.have_fut.clear()
if self.fut:
self.fut.set_result('hi')
self.fut = None
asyncio.run_coroutine_threadsafe(foo(), loop).result()
async def make(self):
future = get_event_loop().create_future()
self.fut = future
self.have_fut.set()
print(await future)
a = A()
Thread(target=a.start, args=(get_event_loop(),), daemon=True).start()
for _ in range(3):
get_event_loop().run_until_complete(a.make())

Callback seems not to be executed when attached to another thread

What I want to do is, in the Python console:
Create an asyncio future
Attach a callback to this future
Set the future value (and so get at the same time the callback result)
To do this, I tried that, in the Python console:
from threading import Thread
import asyncio
def start_loop(loop):
asyncio.set_event_loop(loop)
loop.run_forever()
new_loop = asyncio.new_event_loop()
t = Thread(target=start_loop, args=(new_loop,))
t.start()
fut = new_loop.create_future()
fut.add_done_callback(lambda _: print("Hey"))
fut.set_result(True)
I expect "Hey" to be printed, but actually I get nothing.
Additional information:
When I do:
import asyncio
loop = asyncio.get_event_loop()
fut = loop.create_future()
fut.add_done_callback(lambda x: print("Hey"))
fut.set_result(True)
loop.run_forever()
I get the expected result, but I had to call run_forever while the future is already set.
My questions are:
Why my first block of code does not do the job as expected ?
Is there a hypothetical syntax like the following existing ?
import asyncio
loop = asyncio.get_event_loop()
fut = loop.create_future()
# Hypothetical part
loop.run_forever_in_background()
# End of hypothetical part
fut.add_done_callback(lambda x: print("Hey"))
fut.set_result(True)
My high level purpose is to play with futures and asyncio directly in the console, to get a better understanding of it.
Pay attention when playing with asyncio loops, futures etc. in multithreading context.
Almost all asyncio objects are not thread safe, which is
typically not a problem unless there is code that works with them from
outside of a Task or a callback.
...
To schedule a coroutine object from a different OS thread, the
run_coroutine_threadsafe() function should be used. It returns a
concurrent.futures.Future to access the result:
from threading import Thread
import asyncio
def start_loop(loop):
asyncio.set_event_loop(loop)
loop.run_forever()
new_loop = asyncio.new_event_loop()
t = Thread(target=start_loop, args=(new_loop,))
t.start()
async def add_future():
fut = new_loop.create_future()
fut.add_done_callback(lambda _: print("Hey"))
fut.set_result(True)
asyncio.run_coroutine_threadsafe(add_future(), loop=new_loop)
Test:
$ python3 test.py
Hey
Another option is using loop.call_soon_threadsafe(callback, *args, context=None).
https://docs.python.org/3/library/asyncio-dev.html#asyncio-multithreading

Running an event loop within its own thread

I'm playing with Python's new(ish) asyncio stuff, trying to combine its event loop with traditional threading. I have written a class that runs the event loop in its own thread, to isolate it, and then provide a (synchronous) method that runs a coroutine on that loop and returns the result. (I realise this makes it a somewhat pointless example, because it necessarily serialises everything, but it's just as a proof-of-concept).
import asyncio
import aiohttp
from threading import Thread
class Fetcher(object):
def __init__(self):
self._loop = asyncio.new_event_loop()
# FIXME Do I need this? It works either way...
#asyncio.set_event_loop(self._loop)
self._session = aiohttp.ClientSession(loop=self._loop)
self._thread = Thread(target=self._loop.run_forever)
self._thread.start()
def __enter__(self):
return self
def __exit__(self, *e):
self._session.close()
self._loop.call_soon_threadsafe(self._loop.stop)
self._thread.join()
self._loop.close()
def __call__(self, url:str) -> str:
# FIXME Can I not get a future from some method of the loop?
future = asyncio.run_coroutine_threadsafe(self._get_response(url), self._loop)
return future.result()
async def _get_response(self, url:str) -> str:
async with self._session.get(url) as response:
assert response.status == 200
return await response.text()
if __name__ == "__main__":
with Fetcher() as fetcher:
while True:
x = input("> ")
if x.lower() == "exit":
break
try:
print(fetcher(x))
except Exception as e:
print(f"WTF? {e.__class__.__name__}")
To avoid this sounding too much like a "Code Review" question, what is the purpose of asynchio.set_event_loop and do I need it in the above? It works fine with and without. Moreover, is there a loop-level method to invoke a coroutine and return a future? It seems a bit odd to do this with a module level function.
You would need to use set_event_loop if you called get_event_loop anywhere and wanted it to return the loop created when you called new_event_loop.
From the docs
If there’s need to set this loop as the event loop for the current context, set_event_loop() must be called explicitly.
Since you do not call get_event_loop anywhere in your example, you can omit the call to set_event_loop.
I might be misinterpreting, but i think the comment by #dirn in the marked answer is incorrect in stating that get_event_loop works from a thread. See the following example:
import asyncio
import threading
async def hello():
print('started hello')
await asyncio.sleep(5)
print('finished hello')
def threaded_func():
el = asyncio.get_event_loop()
el.run_until_complete(hello())
thread = threading.Thread(target=threaded_func)
thread.start()
This produces the following error:
RuntimeError: There is no current event loop in thread 'Thread-1'.
It can be fixed by:
- el = asyncio.get_event_loop()
+ el = asyncio.new_event_loop()
The documentation also specifies that this trick (creating an eventloop by calling get_event_loop) only works on the main thread:
If there is no current event loop set in the current OS thread, the OS thread is main, and set_event_loop() has not yet been called, asyncio will create a new event loop and set it as the current one.
Finally, the docs also recommend to use get_running_loop instead of get_event_loop if you're on version 3.7 or higher

Categories