We Keep Coding

Run an object method in a daemon thread in python

I am trying to simulate an environment with vms and trying to run an object method in background thread. My code looks like the following.
hyper_v.py file :
import random
from threading import Thread
from virtual_machine import VirtualMachine
class HyperV(object):
def __init__(self, hyperv_name):
self.hyperv_name = hyperv_name
self.vms_created = {}
def create_vm(self, vm_name):
if vm_name not in self.vms_created:
vm1 = VirtualMachine({'vm_name': vm_name})
self.vms_created[vm_name] = vm1
vm1.boot()
else:
print('VM:', vm_name, 'already exists')
def get_vm_stats(self, vm_name):
print('vm stats of ', vm_name)
print(self.vms_created[vm_name].get_values())
if __name__ == '__main__':
hv = HyperV('temp')
vm_name = 'test-vm'
hv.create_vm(vm_name)
print('getting vm stats')
th2 = Thread(name='vm1_stats', target=hv.get_vm_stats(vm_name) )
th2.start()
virtual_machine.py file in the same directory:
import random, time, uuid, json
from threading import Thread
class VirtualMachine(object):
def __init__(self, interval = 2, *args, **kwargs):
self.vm_id = str(uuid.uuid4())
#self.vm_name = kwargs['vm_name']
self.cpu_percentage = 0
self.ram_percentage = 0
self.disk_percentage = 0
self.interval = interval
def boot(self):
print('Bootingup', self.vm_id)
th = Thread(name='vm1', target=self.update() )
th.daemon = True #Setting the thread as daemon thread to run in background
print(th.isDaemon()) #This prints true
th.start()
def update(self):
# This method needs to run in the background simulating an actual vm with changing values.
i = 0
while(i < 5 ): #Added counter for debugging, ideally this would be while(True)
i+=1
time.sleep(self.interval)
print('updating', self.vm_id)
self.cpu_percentage = round(random.uniform(0,100),2)
self.ram_percentage = round(random.uniform(0,100),2)
self.disk_percentage = round(random.uniform(0,100),2)
def get_values(self):
return_json = {'cpu_percentage': self.cpu_percentage,
'ram_percentage': self.ram_percentage,
'disk_percentage': self.disk_percentage}
return json.dumps(return_json)
The idea is to create a thread that keeps on updating the values and on request, we read the values of the vm object by calling the vm_obj.get_values() we would be creating multiple vm_objects to simulate multiple vms running in parallel and we need to get the information from a particular vm on request.
The problem, that I am facing, is that the update() function of the vm doesnot run in the background (even though the thread is set as daemon thread).
The method call hv.get_vm_stats(vm_name) waits until the completion of vm_object.update() (which is called by vm_object.boot()) and then prints the stats. I would like to get the stats of the vm on request by keeping the vm_object.update() running in the background forever.
Please share your thoughts if I am overlooking anything related to the basics. I tried looking into the issues related to the python threading library but I could not come to any conclusion. Any help is greatly appreciated. The next steps would be to have a REST api to call these functions to get the data of any vm but I am struck with this problem.
Thanks in advance,

As pointed out by #Klaus D in the comments, my mistake was using the braces when specifying the target function in the thread definition, which resulted in the function being called right away.
target=self.update() will call the method right away. Remove the () to
hand the method over to the thread without calling it.

Python - Non-empty shared list on separate thread appears empty

I've two classes - MessageProducer and MessageConsumer.
MessageConsumer does the following:
receives messages and puts them in its message list "_unprocessed_msgs"
on a separate worker thread, moves the messages to internal list "_in_process_msgs"
on the worker thread, processes messages from "_in_process_msgs"
On my development environment, I'm facing issue with #2 above - after adding a message by performing step#1, when worker thread checks length of "_unprocessed_msgs", it gets it as zero.
When step #1 is repeated, the list properly shows 2 items on the thread on which the item was added. But in step #2, on worker thread, again the len(_unprocessed_msgs) returns zero.
Not sure why this is happening. Would really appreciate help any help on this.
I'm using Ubuntu 16.04 having Python 2.7.12.
Below is the sample source code. Please let me know if more information is required.
import threading
import time
class MessageConsumerThread(threading.Thread):
def __init__(self):
super(MessageConsumerThread, self).__init__()
self._unprocessed_msg_q = []
self._in_process_msg_q = []
self._lock = threading.Lock()
self._stop_processing = False
def start_msg_processing_thread(self):
self._stop_processing = False
self.start()
def stop_msg_processing_thread(self):
self._stop_processing = True
def receive_msg(self, msg):
with self._lock:
LOG.info("Before: MessageConsumerThread::receive_msg: "
"len(self._unprocessed_msg_q)=%s" %
len(self._unprocessed_msg_q))
self._unprocessed_msg_q.append(msg)
LOG.info("After: MessageConsumerThread::receive_msg: "
"len(self._unprocessed_msg_q)=%s" %
len(self._unprocessed_msg_q))
def _queue_unprocessed_msgs(self):
with self._lock:
LOG.info("MessageConsumerThread::_queue_unprocessed_msgs: "
"len(self._unprocessed_msg_q)=%s" %
len(self._unprocessed_msg_q))
if self._unprocessed_msg_q:
LOG.info("Moving messages from unprocessed to in_process queue")
self._in_process_msg_q += self._unprocessed_msg_q
self._unprocessed_msg_q = []
LOG.info("Moved messages from unprocessed to in_process queue")
def run(self):
while not self._stop_processing:
# Allow other threads to add messages to message queue
time.sleep(1)
# Move unprocessed listeners to in-process listener queue
self._queue_unprocessed_msgs()
# If nothing to process continue the loop
if not self._in_process_msg_q:
continue
for msg in self._in_process_msg_q:
self.consume_message(msg)
# Clean up processed messages
del self._in_process_msg_q[:]
def consume_message(self, msg):
print(msg)
class MessageProducerThread(threading.Thread):
def __init__(self, producer_id, msg_receiver):
super(MessageProducerThread, self).__init__()
self._producer_id = producer_id
self._msg_receiver = msg_receiver
def start_producing_msgs(self):
self.start()
def run(self):
for i in range(1,10):
msg = "From: %s; Message:%s" %(self._producer_id, i)
self._msg_receiver.receive_msg(msg)
def main():
msg_receiver_thread = MessageConsumerThread()
msg_receiver_thread.start_msg_processing_thread()
msg_producer_thread = MessageProducerThread(producer_id='Producer-01',
msg_receiver=msg_receiver_thread)
msg_producer_thread.start_producing_msgs()
msg_producer_thread.join()
msg_receiver_thread.stop_msg_processing_thread()
msg_receiver_thread.join()
if __name__ == '__main__':
main()
Following is the log the I get:
INFO: MessageConsumerThread::_queue_unprocessed_msgs: len(self._unprocessed_msg_q)=0
INFO: Before: MessageConsumerThread::receive_msg: len(self._unprocessed_msg_q)=0
INFO: After: MessageConsumerThread::receive_msg: **len(self._unprocessed_msg_q)=1**
INFO: MessageConsumerThread::_queue_unprocessed_msgs: **len(self._unprocessed_msg_q)=0**
INFO: MessageConsumerThread::_queue_unprocessed_msgs: len(self._unprocessed_msg_q)=0
INFO: Before: MessageConsumerThread::receive_msg: len(self._unprocessed_msg_q)=1
INFO: After: MessageConsumerThread::receive_msg: **len(self._unprocessed_msg_q)=2**
INFO: MessageConsumerThread::_queue_unprocessed_msgs: **len(self._unprocessed_msg_q)=0**

This is not a good desing for you application.
I spent some time trying to debug this - but threading code is naturally complicated, so we should try to descomplicate it, instead of getting it even more confure.
When I see threading code in Python, I usually see it written a in a procedural form: a normal function that is passed to threading.Thread as the target argument that drives each thread. That way, you don't need to write code for a new class that will have a single instance.
Another thing is that, although Python's global interpreter lock itself guarantees lists won't get corrupted if modified in two separate threads, lists are not a recomended "thread data passing" data structure. You probably should look at threading.Queue to do that
The thing is wrong in this code at first sight is probably not the cause of your problem due to your use of locks, but it might be. Instead of
self._unprocessed_msg_q = []
which will create a new list object, the other thread have momentarily no reference too (so it might write data to the old list), you should do:
self._unprocessed_msg_q[:] = []
Or just the del slice thing you do on the other method.
But to be on the safer side, and having mode maintanable and less surprising code, you really should change to a procedural approach there, assuming Python threading. Assume "Thread" is the "final" object that can do its thing, and then use Queues around:
# coding: utf-8
from __future__ import print_function
from __future__ import unicode_literals
from threading import Thread
try:
from queue import Queue, Empty
except ImportError:
from Queue import Queue, Empty
import time
import random
TERMINATE_SENTINEL = object()
NO_DATA_SENTINEL = object()
class Receiver(object):
def __init__(self, queue):
self.queue = queue
self.in_process = []
def receive_data(self, data):
self.in_process.append(data)
def consume_data(self):
print("received data:", self.in_process)
del self.in_process[:]
def receiver_loop(self):
queue = self.queue
while True:
try:
data = queue.get(block=False)
except Empty:
print("got no data from queue")
data = NO_DATA_SENTINEL
if data is TERMINATE_SENTINEL:
print("Got sentinel: exiting receiver loop")
break
self.receive_data(data)
time.sleep(random.uniform(0, 0.3))
if queue.empty():
# Only process data if we have nothing to receive right now:
self.consume_data()
print("sleeping receiver")
time.sleep(1)
if self.in_process:
self.consume_data()
def producer_loop(queue):
for i in range(10):
time.sleep(random.uniform(0.05, 0.4))
print("putting {0} in queue".format(i))
queue.put(i)
def main():
msg_queue = Queue()
msg_receiver_thread = Thread(target=Receiver(msg_queue).receiver_loop)
time.sleep(0.1)
msg_producer_thread = Thread(target=producer_loop, args=(msg_queue,))
msg_receiver_thread.start()
msg_producer_thread.start()
msg_producer_thread.join()
msg_queue.put(TERMINATE_SENTINEL)
msg_receiver_thread.join()
if __name__ == '__main__':
main()
note that since you want multiple methods in the recever thread to do things with data, I used a class - but it does not inherit from Thread, and does not have to worry about its workings. All its methods are called within the same thread: no need of locks, no worries about race conditions within the receiver class itself. For communicating outside the class, the Queue class is structured to handle any race conditions for us.
The producer loop, as it is just a dummy producer, has no need at all to be written in class form. But it would look just the same, if it had more methods.
(The random sleeps help visualize what would happen in "real world" message receiving)
Also, you might want to take a look at something like:
https://www.thoughtworks.com/insights/blog/composition-vs-inheritance-how-choose

Finally I was able to solve the issue. In the actual code, I've a Manager class that is responsible for instantiating MessageConsumerThread as its last thing in the initializer:
class Manager(object):
def __init__(self):
...
...
self._consumer = MessageConsumerThread(self)
self._consumer.start_msg_processing_thread()
The problem seems to be with passing 'self' in MessageConsumerThread initializer when Manager is still executing its initializer (eventhough those are last two steps). The moment I moved the creation of consumer out of initializer, consumer thread was able to see the elements in "_unprocessed_msg_q".
Please note that the issue is still not reproducible with the above sample code. It is manifesting itself in the production environment only. Without the above fix, I tried queue and dictionary as well but observed the same issue. After the fix, tried with queue and list and was able to successfully execute the code.
I really appreciate and thank #jsbueno and #ivan_pozdeev for their time and help! Community #stackoverflow is very helpful!

How to have one single loop tailing a collection and serving all of the WebSocketHandlers in Tornado?

The following code runs a single while True loop and serves all of the listeners with the same data. It works as I intended it to work but I think it is ugly. Is there a better way to achieve this?
In reality I will tail MongoDB oplog, parse the output and serve only interested listeners. In that case listeners would be a dict with key being ObjectID for example and value an array of WebSocketHandlers. Does this sound like a good idea?
class TestHandler(WebSocketHandler):
running = False
listeners = []
#gen.coroutine
def open(self):
TestHandler.listeners.append(self)
if not TestHandler.running:
TestHandler.start_stream()
def on_close(self):
TestHandler.listeners.remove(self)
#staticmethod
#gen.coroutine
def start_stream():
# this will in reality tail mongodb oplog and serve changes
# but this is nice enough to demonstrate the problem
TestHandler.running = True
i = 0
while True:
for socket in TestHandler.listeners:
socket.write_message(str(i))
i += 1
loop = IOLoop.instance()
yield gen.Task(loop.add_timeout, time.time() + 1)

Remove threads usage from script

The next script I'm using is used to listen to IMAP connection using IMAP IDLE and depends heavily on threads. What's the easiest way for me to eliminate the treads call and just use the main thread?
As a new python developer I tried editing def __init__(self, conn): method but just got more and more errors
A code sample would help me a lot
#!/usr/local/bin/python2.7
print "Content-type: text/html\r\n\r\n";
import socket, ssl, json, struct, re
import imaplib2, time
from threading import *
# enter gmail login details here
USER="username#gmail.com"
PASSWORD="password"
# enter device token here
deviceToken = 'my device token x x x x x'
deviceToken = deviceToken.replace(' ','').decode('hex')
currentBadgeNum = -1
def getUnseen():
(resp, data) = M.status("INBOX", '(UNSEEN)')
print data
return int(re.findall("UNSEEN (\d)*\)", data[0])[0])
def sendPushNotification(badgeNum):
global currentBadgeNum, deviceToken
if badgeNum != currentBadgeNum:
currentBadgeNum = badgeNum
thePayLoad = {
'aps': {
'alert':'Hello world!',
'sound':'',
'badge': badgeNum,
},
'test_data': { 'foo': 'bar' },
}
theCertfile = 'certif.pem'
theHost = ('gateway.push.apple.com', 2195)
data = json.dumps(thePayLoad)
theFormat = '!BH32sH%ds' % len(data)
theNotification = struct.pack(theFormat, 0, 32,
deviceToken, len(data), data)
ssl_sock = ssl.wrap_socket(socket.socket(socket.AF_INET,
socket.SOCK_STREAM), certfile=theCertfile)
ssl_sock.connect(theHost)
ssl_sock.write(theNotification)
ssl_sock.close()
print "Sent Push alert."
# This is the threading object that does all the waiting on
# the event
class Idler(object):
def __init__(self, conn):
self.thread = Thread(target=self.idle)
self.M = conn
self.event = Event()
def start(self):
self.thread.start()
def stop(self):
# This is a neat trick to make thread end. Took me a
# while to figure that one out!
self.event.set()
def join(self):
self.thread.join()
def idle(self):
# Starting an unending loop here
while True:
# This is part of the trick to make the loop stop
# when the stop() command is given
if self.event.isSet():
return
self.needsync = False
# A callback method that gets called when a new
# email arrives. Very basic, but that's good.
def callback(args):
if not self.event.isSet():
self.needsync = True
self.event.set()
# Do the actual idle call. This returns immediately,
# since it's asynchronous.
self.M.idle(callback=callback)
# This waits until the event is set. The event is
# set by the callback, when the server 'answers'
# the idle call and the callback function gets
# called.
self.event.wait()
# Because the function sets the needsync variable,
# this helps escape the loop without doing
# anything if the stop() is called. Kinda neat
# solution.
if self.needsync:
self.event.clear()
self.dosync()
# The method that gets called when a new email arrives.
# Replace it with something better.
def dosync(self):
print "Got an event!"
numUnseen = getUnseen()
sendPushNotification(numUnseen)
# Had to do this stuff in a try-finally, since some testing
# went a little wrong.....
while True:
try:
# Set the following two lines to your creds and server
M = imaplib2.IMAP4_SSL("imap.gmail.com")
M.login(USER, PASSWORD)
M.debug = 4
# We need to get out of the AUTH state, so we just select
# the INBOX.
M.select("INBOX")
numUnseen = getUnseen()
sendPushNotification(numUnseen)
typ, data = M.fetch(1, '(RFC822)')
raw_email = data[0][1]
import email
email_message = email.message_from_string(raw_email)
print email_message['Subject']
#print M.status("INBOX", '(UNSEEN)')
# Start the Idler thread
idler = Idler(M)
idler.start()
# Sleep forever, one minute at a time
while True:
time.sleep(60)
except imaplib2.IMAP4.abort:
print("Disconnected. Trying again.")
finally:
# Clean up.
#idler.stop() #Commented out to see the real error
#idler.join() #Commented out to see the real error
#M.close() #Commented out to see the real error
# This is important!
M.logout()

As far as I can tell, this code is hopelessly confused because the author used the "imaplib2" project library which forces a threading model which this code then never uses.
Only one thread is ever created, which wouldn't need to be a thread but for the choice of imaplib2. However, as the imaplib2 documentation notes:
This module presents an almost identical API as that provided by the standard python library module imaplib, the main difference being that this version allows parallel execution of commands on the IMAP4 server, and implements the IMAP4rev1 IDLE extension. (imaplib2 can be substituted for imaplib in existing clients with no changes in the code, but see the caveat below.)
Which makes it appear that you should be able to throw out much of class Idler and just use the connection M. I recommend that you look at Doug Hellman's excellent Python Module Of The Week for module imaplib prior to looking at the official documentation. You'll need to reverse engineer the code to find out its intent, but it looks to me like:
Open a connection to GMail
check for unseen messages in Inbox
count unseen messages from (2)
send a dummy message to some service at gateway.push.apple.com
Wait for notice, goto (2)
Perhaps the most interesting thing about the code is that it doesn't appear to do anything, although what sendPushNotification (step 4) does is a mystery, and the one line that uses an imaplib2 specific service:
self.M.idle(callback=callback)
uses a named argument that I don't see in the module documentation. Do you know if this code ever actually ran?
Aside from unneeded complexity, there's another reason to drop imaplib2: it exists independently on sourceforge and PyPi which one maintainer claimed two years ago "An attempt will be made to keep it up-to-date with the original". Which one do you have? Which would you install?

Don't do it
Since you are trying to remove the Thread usage solely because you didn't find how to handle the exceptions from the server, I don't recommend removing the Thread usage, because of the async nature of the library itself - the Idler handles it more smoothly than a one thread could.
Solution
You need to wrap the self.M.idle(callback=callback) with try-except and then re-raise it in the main thread. Then you handle the exception by re-running the code in the main thread to restart the connection.
You can find more details of the solution and possible reasons in this answer: https://stackoverflow.com/a/50163971/1544154
Complete solution is here: https://www.github.com/Elijas/email-notifier

python multithreading synchronization

I am having a synchronization problem while threading with cPython. I have two files, I parse them and return the desired result. However, the code below acts strangely and returns three times instead of two plus doesn't return in the order I put them into queue. Here's the code:
import Queue
import threading
from HtmlDoc import Document
OUT_LIST = []
class Threader(threading.Thread):
"""
Start threading
"""
def __init__(self, queue, out_queue):
threading.Thread.__init__(self)
self.queue = queue
self.out_queue = out_queue
def run(self):
while True:
if self.queue.qsize() == 0: break
path, host = self.queue.get()
f = open(path, "r")
source = f.read()
f.close()
self.out_queue.put((source, host))
self.queue.task_done()
class Processor(threading.Thread):
"""
Process threading
"""
def __init__(self, out_queue):
self.out_queue = out_queue
self.l_first = []
self.f_append = self.l_first.append
self.l_second = []
self.s_append = self.l_second.append
threading.Thread.__init__(self)
def first(self, doc):
# some code to to retrieve the text desired, this works 100% I tested it manually
def second(self, doc):
# some code to to retrieve the text desired, this works 100% I tested it manually
def run(self):
while True:
if self.out_queue.qsize() == 0: break
doc, host = self.out_queue.get()
if host == "first":
self.first(doc)
elif host == "second":
self.second(doc)
OUT_LIST.extend(self.l_first + self.l_second)
self.out_queue.task_done()
def main():
queue = Queue.Queue()
out_queue = Queue.Queue()
queue.put(("...first.html", "first"))
queue.put(("...second.html", "second"))
qsize = queue.qsize()
for i in range(qsize):
t = Threader(queue, out_queue)
t.setDaemon(True)
t.start()
for i in range(qsize):
dt = Processor(out_queue)
dt.setDaemon(True)
dt.start()
queue.join()
out_queue.join()
print '<br />'.join(OUT_LIST)
main()
Now, when I print, I'd like to print the content of the "first" first of all and then the content of the "second". Can anyone help me?
NOTE: I am threading because actually I will have to connect more than 10 places at a time and retrieve its results. I believe that threading is the most appropriate way to accomplish such a task

I am threading because actually I will have to connect more than 10 places at a time and retrieve its results. I believe that threading is the most appropriate way to accomplish such a task
Threading is actually one of the most error-prone ways to manage multiple concurrent connections. A more powerful, more debuggable approach is to use event-driven asynchronous networking, such as implemented by Twisted. If you're interested in using this model, you might want to check out this introduction.

I dont share the same opinion that threading is the best way to do this (IMO some events/select mechanism would be better) but problem with your code could be in variables t and dt. You have the assignements in the cycle and object instances are to stored anywhere - so it may be possible that your new instance of Thread/Processor get deleted at the end of the each cycle.
It would be more clarified if you show us precise output of this code.

1) You cannot control order of job completion. It depends on execution time, so to return results as you want you can create global dictionary with job objects, like job_results : {'first' : None, 'second' : None} and store results here, than you can fetch data on desired order
2) self.first and self.second should be cleared after each processed doc, else you will have duplicates in OUT_LIST
3) You may use multi-processing with subprocess module and put all result data to CSV files for example and them sort them as you wish.