fireattack <human.p...@gmail.com> added the comment:
Hi gaoxinge, thanks for the reply.
I assume what you mean is that while shutdown will wait, it won't accept any
new job/future after it is called.
That makes sense, but this still doesn't work:
```
from concurrent.futures import ThreadPoolExecutor
from time import sleep
def wait_on_future():
sleep(1)
f2 = executor.submit(pow, 5, 2)
print(f2.result())
executor.shutdown(wait=True) #Uncomment/comment this makes no difference
executor = ThreadPoolExecutor(max_workers=100)
f = executor.submit(wait_on_future)
```
This shows no error, but f2.result() is still not printed (`result()` has
built-in wait). Actually, f2 is not executed at all (you can change pow to
other func to see that).
Please notice this example is modified from an example from the official
documentation: https://docs.python.org/3/library/concurrent.futures.html
In that example, the comment says "This will never complete because there is
only one worker thread and it is executing this function.", which is correct.
But this is kinda misleading because it implies it will work if you increase
the number of the worker. However, it will NOT work if you increase the number
of worker, but also add a small delay, like shown above.
The point is, I failed to find a way to keep executor from main thread alive to
accept future/job from a child thread if there is a delay. I tried
shutdown/nothing/with/as_completed they all fail in similar fashion.
----------
_______________________________________
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<https://bugs.python.org/issue40093>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
