Sharing asyncio objects between processes - python

I am working with both the asyncio and the multiprocessing library to run two processes, each with one server instance listening on different ports for incoming messages.
To identify each client, I want to share a dict between the two processes to update the list of known clients. To achieve this, I decided to use a Tuple[StreamReader, StreamWriter] lookup key which is assigned a Client object for this connection.
However, as soon as I insert or simply access the shared dict, the program crashes with the following error message:
Task exception was never retrieved
future: <Task finished name='Task-5' coro=<GossipServer.handle_client() done, defined at /home/croemheld/Documents/network/server.py:119> exception=AttributeError("Can't pickle local object 'WeakSet.__init__.<locals>._remove'")>
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/home/croemheld/Documents/network/server.py", line 128, in handle_client
if not await self.handle_message(reader, writer, buffer):
File "/home/croemheld/Documents/network/server.py", line 160, in handle_message
client = self.syncmanager.get_api_client((reader, writer))
File "<string>", line 2, in get_api_client
File "/usr/lib/python3.9/multiprocessing/managers.py", line 808, in _callmethod
conn.send((self._id, methodname, args, kwds))
File "/usr/lib/python3.9/multiprocessing/connection.py", line 211, in send
self._send_bytes(_ForkingPickler.dumps(obj))
File "/usr/lib/python3.9/multiprocessing/reduction.py", line 51, in dumps
cls(buf, protocol).dump(obj)
AttributeError: Can't pickle local object 'WeakSet.__init__.<locals>._remove'
Naturally I looked up the error message and found this question, but I don't really understand what the reason is here. As far as I understand, the reason for this crash is that StreamReader and StreamWriter cannot be pickled/serialized in order to be shared between processes. If that is in fact the reason, is there a way to pickle them, maybe by patching the reducer function to instead use a different pickler?

You might be interested in using SyncManager instead. just be sure to close the manager by calling shutdown at the end so no zombie process is left.
from multiprocessing.managers import SyncManager
from multiprocessing import Process
import signal
my_manager = SyncManager()
# to avoid closing the manager by ctrl+C. be sure to handle KeyboardInterrupt errors and close the manager accordingly
def manager_init():
signal.signal(signal.SIGINT, signal.SIG_IGN)
my_manager.start(manager_init)
my_dict = my_manager.dict()
my_dict["clients"] = my_manager.list()
def my_process(my_id, the_dict):
for i in range(3):
the_dict["clients"].append(f"{my_id}_{i}")
processes = []
for j in range(4):
processes.append(Process(target=my_process, args=(j,my_dict)))
for p in processes:
p.start()
for p in processes:
p.join()
print(my_dict["clients"])
# ['0_0', '2_0', '0_1', '3_0', '1_0', '0_2', '1_1', '2_1', '3_1', '1_2', '2_2', '3_2']
my_manager.shutdown()

I managed to find a workaround while also keeping the asyncio and multiprocessing libraries without any other libraries.
First, since the StreamReader and StreamWriter objects are not pickable, I am forced to use a socket. This is easily achievable with a simple function:
def get_socket(writer: StreamWriter):
fileno = writer.get_extra_info('socket').fileno()
return socket.fromfd(fileno, AddressFamily.AF_INET, socket.SOCK_STREAM)
The socket is inserted into the shared object (e.g. Manager().dict() or even a custom class, which you have to register via a custom BaseManager instance). Now, since the application is build on asyncio and makes use of the streams provided by the library, we can easily convert the socket back to a pair of StreamReader and StreamWriter via:
node_reader, node_writer = await asyncio.open_connection(sock=self.node_sock)
node_writer.write(mesg_text)
await node_writer.drain()
Where self.node_sock is the socket instance that was passed through the shared object.

Related

Logging Signals in Python

I have a single-threaded Python application. The standard way in which this application gets shut down is by sending it SIGINT and letting the various with: and try: finally: blocks handle a safe and graceful shutdown. However, this results in a not-particularly-readable logfile, since you simply start seeing the messages from the handlers with no clear indication of what's going on or why its shutting down.
I tried to solve this by adding a simple signal handler that would log the received signal before raising KeyboardInterrupt, like so:
def log_and_exit_handler(signum, stack):
logger.info(f"Terminating due to signal {_signal.Signals(signum)}", stack_info=True)
raise KeyboardInterrupt()
_signal.signal(_signal.SIGINT, log_and_exit_handler)
However, while testing it, I got a logging error:
--- Logging error ---
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/local/lib/python3.7/logging/__init__.py", line 1029, in emit
self.flush()
File "/usr/local/lib/python3.7/logging/__init__.py", line 1009, in flush
self.stream.flush()
RuntimeError: reentrant call inside <_io.BufferedWriter name='<stderr>'>
Call stack:
[REDACTED]
File "[REDACTED]", line 485, in _save_checkpoint
_logger.info(f"Checkpoint saved")
File "/usr/local/lib/python3.7/logging/__init__.py", line 1378, in info
self._log(INFO, msg, args, **kwargs)
File "/usr/local/lib/python3.7/logging/__init__.py", line 1514, in _log
self.handle(record)
File "/usr/local/lib/python3.7/logging/__init__.py", line 1524, in handle
self.callHandlers(record)
File "/usr/local/lib/python3.7/logging/__init__.py", line 1586, in callHandlers
hdlr.handle(record)
File "/usr/local/lib/python3.7/logging/__init__.py", line 894, in handle
self.emit(record)
File "/usr/local/lib/python3.7/logging/__init__.py", line 1029, in emit
self.flush()
File "/usr/local/lib/python3.7/logging/__init__.py", line 1009, in flush
self.stream.flush()
File "[REDACTED]", line 203, in log_and_exit_handler
logger.info("Terminating due to signal {signal_}".format(signal_=signal_), stack_info=True)
Message: 'Terminating due to signal 2'
Arguments: ()
Apparently, the app was already in the middle of outputting a log message when the signal was received, and the logging module is not re-entrant.
Are there any workarounds or alternate approaches I can use to safely accomplish my goal of logging a signal when it is received?
I was unable to reproduce so couldn't verify these solutions. (Are you doing something funky that would cause excessively long writes to stderr?)
Avoid using stderr in log_and_exit_handler
Default logger has been configured to write to stderr. It appears the program was interrupted while using stderr so it can't be accessed again. Really, you'll need to avoid any IO that may be used in the program. Delete the stderr handler from the root logger (to avoid access attempt on stderr) and add a file handler instead.
Use sys.excepthook
Similar function but it's default operation is to write to stderr so should be safe. Seem's like io limition of signal handlers is well known. Hopefully handling via the excepthook gets around it.
So, I finally found a solution: block the offending signals whenever we're writing a log message to STDERR using signal.pthread_sigmask(), then unblock them after. Signals are blocked are not lost, and will be processed as soon as the block is removed.
class SignalSafeStreamHandler(logging.StreamHandler):
"""Stream handler that blocks signals while emitting a record.
The locks for writing to streams like STDERR are not reentrant,
resulting in a potential logging failure if, while in the process of writing a log message,
we process a signal and the signal handler tries to log something itself.
This class keeps a list of signals which have handlers that might try to log anything,
and blocks those signals for the duration of the write operation.
After the write op is done, it unblocks the signals, allowing any that arrived during the duration to be processed.
"""
def __init__(self, stream=None):
super().__init__(stream=stream)
self._signals_to_block: _tp.Set[_signal.Signals] = set()
#property
def signals_to_block(self) -> _tp.Set[_signal.Signals]:
"""The set of signals to block while writing to the stream"""
return set(self._signals_to_block)
def add_blocked_signal(self, signal: _signal.Signals) -> None:
"""Add the given signal to the list of signals to block"""
self._signals_to_block.add(signal)
def emit(self, record: logging.LogRecord) -> None:
"""Emit the given record; if this is the main thread, block the set signals while doing so"""
# Only the main thread is subject to signal handling; other threads can operate normally
if _threading.current_thread() is not _threading.main_thread():
super().emit(record)
return
# We block any signals which have handlers that want to do logging while we write.
old_blocked_signals: _tp.Set[_signal.Signals] = _signal.pthread_sigmask(
_signal.SIG_BLOCK,
self._signals_to_block,
)
try:
# Delegate to the parent method to do the actual logging
super().emit(record)
finally:
# Now we unblock the signals
# (or, more precisely, restore the old set of blocked signals;
# if one of those signals was already blocked when we started, it will stay that way).
#
# Any signals of those types which were received in the duration
# will immediately be processed and their handlers run.
_signal.pthread_sigmask(_signal.SIG_SETMASK, old_blocked_signals)
_root_handler = SignalSafeStreamHandler()
logging.root.addHandler(_root_handler)
def log_and_exit_handler(signum, stack):
logger.info(f"Terminating due to signal {_signal.Signals(signum)}", stack_info=True)
raise KeyboardInterrupt()
_signal.signal(_signal.SIGINT, log_and_exit_handler)
_root_handler.add_blocked_signal(signal)
This solution could be extended to other logging handlers besides StreamHandler, e.g. if you're logging to JournalD or to a DB. However, be cautious using it for any handler where the write operation could potentially take a non-trivial amount of time to complete. For example, if you're logging to a DB and the DB goes down, the write operation would freeze until the DB request times out, and you'd be unable to interrupt it earlier because SIGINT is masked for the duration. On possible solution would be to use a seperate thread to do the logging; only the main thread is subject to interruption by a signal handler.
Limitation: Signal masking is only available on Linux, not Windows.

explicit switch() with gevent

I have a primitive producer/consumer script running in gevent. It starts a few producer functions that put things into a gevent.queue.Queue, and one consumer function that fetches them out of the queue again:
from __future__ import print_function
import time
import gevent
import gevent.queue
import gevent.monkey
q = gevent.queue.Queue()
# define and spawn a consumer
def consumer():
while True:
item = q.get(block=True)
print('consumer got {}'.format(item))
consumer_greenlet = gevent.spawn(consumer)
# define and spawn a few producers
def producer(ID):
while True:
print("producer {} about to put".format(ID))
q.put('something from {}'.format(ID))
time.sleep(0.1)
# consumer_greenlet.switch()
producer_greenlets = [gevent.spawn(producer, i) for i in range(5)]
# wait indefinitely
gevent.monkey.patch_all()
print("about to join")
consumer_greenlet.join()
It works fine if I let gevent handle the scheduling implicitly (e.g. by calling time.sleep or some other gevent.monkey.patch()ed function), however when I switch to the consumer explicitly (replace time.sleepwith the commented-out switch call), gevent raises an AssertionError:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/my/virtualenvs/venv/local/lib/python2.7/site-packages/gevent/greenlet.py", line 327, in run
result = self._run(*self.args, **self.kwargs)
File "switch_test.py", line 14, in consumer
item = q.get(block=True)
File "/my/virtualenvs/venv/lib/python2.7/site-packages/gevent/queue.py", line 201, in get
assert result is waiter, 'Invalid switch into Queue.get: %r' % (result, )
AssertionError: Invalid switch into Queue.get: ()
<Greenlet at 0x7fde6fa6c870: consumer> failed with AssertionError
I would like to employ explicit switching because in production I have a lot of producers, gevent's scheduling does not allocate nearly enough runtime to the consumer and the queue gets longer and longer (which is bad). Alternatively, any insights into how to configure or modify gevent's scheduler is greatly appreciated.
This is on Python 2.7.2, gevent 1.0.1 and greenlet 0.4.5.
Seems to me explicit switch doesn't really play well with implicit switch.
You already have implicit switch happening either because monkey-patched I/O or because the gevent.queue.Queue().
The gevent documentation discourages usage of the raw greenlet methods:
Being a greenlet subclass, Greenlet also has switch() and throw()
methods. However, these should not be used at the application level as
they can very easily lead to greenlets that are forever unscheduled.
Prefer higher-level safe classes, like Event and Queue, instead.
Iterating gevent.queue.Queue() or accessing the queue's get method does implicit switching, interestingly put does not. So you have to generate an implicit thread switch yourself. Easiest is to call gevent.sleep(0) (you don't have to actually wait a specific time).
In conclusion you don't even have to monkey-pach things, provide that your code does not have blocking IO operations.
I would rewrite your code like this:
import gevent
import gevent.queue
q = gevent.queue.Queue()
# define and spawn a consumer
def consumer():
for item in q:
print('consumer got {}'.format(item))
consumer_greenlet = gevent.spawn(consumer)
# define and spawn a few producers
def producer(ID):
print('producer started', ID)
while True:
print("producer {} about to put".format(ID))
q.put('something from {}'.format(ID))
gevent.sleep(0)
producer_greenlets = [gevent.spawn(producer, i) for i in range(5)]
# wait indefinitely
print("about to join")
consumer_greenlet.join()

Streaming sockets from ProcessPoolExecutor

I'm trying to create a Python application in which one process (process 'A') receives a request and puts it into a ProcessPool (from concurrent.futures). In handling this request, a message may need to passed to a second process (process 'B'). I'm using tornado's iostream module to help wrap the connections and get responses.
Process A is failing to successfully connect to process B from within the ProcessPool execution. Where am I going wrong?
The client, which makes the initial request to process A:
#!/usr/bin/env python
import socket
import tornado.iostream
import tornado.ioloop
def print_message ( data ):
print 'client received', data
s = socket.socket(socket.AF_INET,socket.SOCK_STREAM, 0)
stream = tornado.iostream.IOStream(s)
stream.connect(('localhost',2001))
stream.read_until('\0',print_message)
stream.write('test message\0')
tornado.ioloop.IOLoop().instance().start()
Process A, that received the initial request:
#!/usr/bin/env python
import tornado.ioloop
import tornado.tcpserver
import tornado.iostream
import socket
import concurrent.futures
import functools
def handle_request ( data ):
s = socket.socket(socket.AF_INET,socket.SOCK_STREAM,0)
out_stream = tornado.iostream.IOStream(s)
out_stream.connect(('localhost',2002))
future = out_stream.read_until('\0')
out_stream.write(data+'\0')
return future.result()
class server_a (tornado.tcpserver.TCPServer):
def return_response ( self, in_stream, future ):
in_stream.write(future.result()+'\0')
def handle_read ( self, in_stream, data ):
future = self.executor.submit(handle_request,data)
future.add_done_callback(functools.partial(self.return_response,in_stream))
def handle_stream ( self, in_stream, address ):
in_stream.read_until('\0',functools.partial(self.handle_read,in_stream))
def __init__ ( self ):
self.executor = concurrent.futures.ProcessPoolExecutor()
tornado.tcpserver.TCPServer.__init__(self)
server = server_a()
server.bind(2001)
server.start(0)
tornado.ioloop.IOLoop().instance().start()
Process B, that should receive the relayed request from Process A:
#!/usr/bin/env python
import tornado.ioloop
import tornado.tcpserver
import functools
class server_b (tornado.tcpserver.TCPServer):
def handle_read ( self, in_stream, data ):
in_stream.write('server B read'+data+'\0')
def handle_stream ( self, in_stream, address ):
in_stream.read_until('\0',functools.partial(self.handle_read,in_stream))
server = server_b()
server.bind(2002)
server.start(0)
tornado.ioloop.IOLoop().instance().start()
And finally, the error returned by Process A, which is raised during the 'read_until' method:
ERROR:concurrent.futures:exception calling callback for <Future at 0x10654b890 state=finished raised OSError>
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/local/lib/python2.7/site-packages/concurrent/futures/_base.py", line 299, in _invoke_callbacks
callback(self)
File "./a.py", line 26, in return_response
in_stream.write(future.result()+'\0')
File "/usr/local/lib/python2.7/site-packages/concurrent/futures/_base.py", line 397, in result
return self.__get_result()
File "/usr/local/lib/python2.7/site-packages/concurrent/futures/_base.py", line 356, in __get_result
raise self._exception
OSError: [Errno 9] Bad file descriptor
I'm not 100% sure why you're getting this "Bad file descriptor" error (concurrent.futures unfortunately lost backtrace information when it was backported to 2.7), but there is no IOLoop running in the ProcessPoolExecutor's worker processes, so you won't be able to use Tornado constructs like IOStream in this context (unless you spin up a new IOLoop for each task, but that may not make much sense unless you need compatibility with other asynchronous libraries).
I'm also not sure if it works to mix tornado's multi-process mode and ProcessPoolExecutor in this way. I think you may need to move the initialization of the ProcessPoolExecutor until after the start(0) call.
OK, I have resolved the issue, by updating process A to have:
def stop_loop ( future ):
tornado.ioloop.IOLoop.current().stop()
def handle_request ( data ):
tornado.ioloop.IOLoop.clear_current()
tornado.ioloop.IOLoop.clear_instance()
s = socket.socket(socket.AF_INET,socket.SOCK_STREAM,0)
out_stream = tornado.iostream.IOStream(s)
out_stream.connect(('localhost',2002))
future = out_stream.read_until('\0')
future.add_done_callback(stop_loop)
out_stream.write(data+'\0')
tornado.ioloop.IOLoop.instance().start()
return future.result()
Even though the IOLoop hadn't previously been started in the spawned process, it was returning its parent loop when calling for the current instance. Clearing out those references has allowed a new loop for the process to be started. I don't know formally what is happening here though.

python, COM and multithreading issue

I'm trying to take a look at IE's DOM from a separate thread that dispatched IE, and for some properties I'm getting a "no such interface supported" error. I managed to reduce the problem to this script:
import threading, time
import pythoncom
from win32com.client import Dispatch, gencache
gencache.EnsureModule('{3050F1C5-98B5-11CF-BB82-00AA00BDCE0B}', 0, 4, 0) # MSHTML
def main():
pythoncom.CoInitializeEx(0)
ie = Dispatch('InternetExplorer.Application')
ie.Visible = True
ie.Navigate('http://www.Rhodia-ecommerce.com/')
while ie.Busy:
time.sleep(1)
def printframes():
pythoncom.CoInitializeEx(0)
document = ie.Document
frames = document.getElementsByTagName(u'frame')
for frame in frames:
obj = frame.contentWindow
thr = threading.Thread(target=printframes)
thr.start()
thr.join()
if __name__ == '__main__':
thr = threading.Thread(target=main)
thr.start()
thr.join()
Everything is fine until the frame.contentWindow. Then bam:
Exception in thread Thread-2:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "C:\python22\lib\threading.py", line 414, in __bootstrap
self.run()
File "C:\python22\lib\threading.py", line 402, in run
apply(self.__target, self.__args, self.__kwargs)
File "testie.py", line 42, in printframes
obj = frame.contentWindow
File "C:\python22\lib\site-packages\win32com\client\__init__.py", line 455, in __getattr__
return self._ApplyTypes_(*args)
File "C:\python22\lib\site-packages\win32com\client\__init__.py", line 446, in _ApplyTypes_
return self._get_good_object_(
com_error: (-2147467262, 'No such interface supported', None, None)
Any hint ?
The correct answer is to marshal stuff by hand. That's not a workaround it is what you are supposed to do here. You shouldn't have to use apartment threading though.
You initialised as multithreaded apartment - that tells COM that it can call your interfaces on any thread. It does not allow you to call other interfaces on any thread, or excuse you from marshalling interfaces provided by COM. That will only work "by accident" - E.g. if the object you are calling happens to be an in-process MTA object, it won't matter.
CoMarshalInterThreadInterfaceInStream/CoGetInterfaceAndReleaseStream does the business.
The reason for this is that objects can provide their own proxies, which may or may not be free-threaded. (Or indeed provide custom marshalling). You have to marshal them to tell them they are moving between threads. If the proxy is free threaded, you may get the same pointer back.

Errno 9 using the multiprocessing module with Tornado in Python

For operations in my Tornado server that are expected to block (and can't be easily modified to use things like Tornado's asynchronous HTTP request client), I have been offloading the work to separate worker processes using the multiprocessing module. Specifically, I was using a multiprocessing Pool because it offers a method called apply_async, which works very well with Tornado since it takes a callback as one of its arguments.
I recently realized that a pool preallocates the number of processes, so if they all become blocking, operations that require a new process will have to wait. I do realize that the server can still take connections since apply_async works by adding things to a task queue, and is rather immediately finished, itself, but I'm looking to spawn n processes for n amount of blocking tasks I need to perform.
I figured that I could use the add_handler method for my Tornado server's IOLoop to add a handler for each new PID that I create to that IOLoop. I've done something similar before, but it was using popen and an arbitrary command. An example of such use of this method is here. I wanted to pass arguments into an arbitrary target Python function within my scope, though, so I wanted to stick with multiprocessing.
However, it seems that something doesn't like the PIDs that my multiprocessing.Process objects have. I get IOError: [Errno 9] Bad file descriptor. Are these processes restricted somehow? I know that the PID isn't available until I actually start the process, but I do start the process. Here's the source code of an example I've made that demonstrates this issue:
#!/usr/bin/env python
"""Creates a small Tornado program to demonstrate asynchronous programming.
Specifically, this demonstrates using the multiprocessing module."""
import tornado.httpserver
import tornado.ioloop
import tornado.web
import multiprocessing as mp
import random
import time
__author__ = 'Brian McFadden'
__email__ = 'brimcfadden#gmail.com'
def sleepy(queue):
"""Pushes a string to the queue after sleeping for 5 seconds.
This sleeping can be thought of as a blocking operation."""
time.sleep(5)
queue.put("Now I'm awake.")
return
def random_num():
"""Returns a string containing a random number.
This function can be used by handlers to receive text for writing which
facilitates noticing change on the webpage when it is refreshed."""
n = random.random()
return "<br />Here is a random number to show change: {0}".format(n)
class SyncHandler(tornado.web.RequestHandler):
"""Demonstrates handing a request synchronously.
It executes sleepy() before writing some more text and a random number to
the webpage. While the process is sleeping, the Tornado server cannot
handle any requests at all."""
def get(self):
q = mp.Queue()
sleepy(q)
val = q.get()
self.write(val)
self.write('<br />Brought to you by SyncHandler.')
self.write('<br />Try refreshing me and then the main page.')
self.write(random_num())
class AsyncHandler(tornado.web.RequestHandler):
"""Demonstrates handing a request asynchronously.
It executes sleepy() before writing some more text and a random number to
the webpage. It passes the sleeping function off to another process using
the multiprocessing module in order to handle more requests concurrently to
the sleeping, which is like a blocking operation."""
#tornado.web.asynchronous
def get(self):
"""Handles the original GET request (normal function delegation).
Instead of directly invoking sleepy(), it passes a reference to the
function to the multiprocessing pool."""
# Create an interprocess data structure, a queue.
q = mp.Queue()
# Create a process for the sleepy function. Provide the queue.
p = mp.Process(target=sleepy, args=(q,))
# Start it, but don't use p.join(); that would block us.
p.start()
# Add our callback function to the IOLoop. The async_callback wrapper
# makes sure that Tornado sends an HTTP 500 error to the client if an
# uncaught exception occurs in the callback.
iol = tornado.ioloop.IOLoop.instance()
print "p.pid:", p.pid
iol.add_handler(p.pid, self.async_callback(self._finish, q), iol.READ)
def _finish(self, q):
"""This is the callback for post-sleepy() request handling.
Operation of this function occurs in the original process."""
val = q.get()
self.write(val)
self.write('<br />Brought to you by AsyncHandler.')
self.write('<br />Try refreshing me and then the main page.')
self.write(random_num())
# Asynchronous handling must be manually finished.
self.finish()
class MainHandler(tornado.web.RequestHandler):
"""Returns a string and a random number.
Try to access this page in one window immediately after (<5 seconds of)
accessing /async or /sync in another window to see the difference between
them. Asynchronously performing the sleepy() function won't make the client
wait for data from this handler, but synchronously doing so will!"""
def get(self):
self.write('This is just responding to a simple request.')
self.write('<br />Try refreshing me after one of the other pages.')
self.write(random_num())
if __name__ == '__main__':
# Create an application using the above handlers.
application = tornado.web.Application([
(r"/", MainHandler),
(r"/sync", SyncHandler),
(r"/async", AsyncHandler),
])
# Create a single-process Tornado server from the application.
http_server = tornado.httpserver.HTTPServer(application)
http_server.listen(8888)
print 'The HTTP server is listening on port 8888.'
tornado.ioloop.IOLoop.instance().start()
Here is the traceback:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/tornado/web.py", line 810, in _stack_context
yield
File "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/tornado/stack_context.py", line 77, in StackContext
yield
File "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/tornado/web.py", line 827, in _execute
getattr(self, self.request.method.lower())(*args, **kwargs)
File "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/tornado/web.py", line 909, in wrapper
return method(self, *args, **kwargs)
File "./process_async.py", line 73, in get
iol.add_handler(p.pid, self.async_callback(self._finish, q), iol.READ)
File "/usr/local/lib/python2.6/dist-packages/tornado/ioloop.py", line 151, in add_handler
self._impl.register(fd, events | self.ERROR)
IOError: [Errno 9] Bad file descriptor
The above code is actually modified from an older example that used process pools. I've had it saved for reference for my coworkers and myself (hence the heavy amount of comments) for quite a while. I constructed it in such a way so that I could open two small browser windows side-by-side to demonstrate to my boss that the /sync URI blocks connections while /async allows more connections. For the purposes of this question, all you need to do to reproduce it is try to access the /async handler. It errors immediately.
What should I do about this? How can the PID be "bad"? If you run the program, you can see it be printed to stdout.
For the record, I'm using Python 2.6.5 on Ubuntu 10.04. Tornado is 1.1.
add_handler takes a valid file descriptor, not a PID. As an example of what's expected, tornado itself uses add_handler normally by passing in a socket object's fileno(), which returns the object's file descriptor. PID is irrelevant in this case.
Check out this project:
https://github.com/vukasin/tornado-subprocess
it allows you to start arbitrary processes from tornado and get a callback when they finish (with access to their status, stdout and stderr).

Categories