Aha. It must be that the Thread object is already gone, but gc runs a
finally clause.

On Monday, April 7, 2014, Lars Andersson <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> Ok, I've managed to reproduce the "Dummy" thread weirdness without
> aiohttp... see attached code. When running this using python 3.4 and
> upstream asyncio (as of April 7) on an ubuntu 12.04 machine, I get the
> following output:
>
> MainThread(140470366000896): Main Enter
> Thread-1(140470315005696): Thread Enter, loop=140470323281760
> Thread-1(140470315005696): Caught RuntimeError: Event loop stopped before
> Future completed.
> Thread-1(140470315005696): Thread Exit
> MainThread(140470366000896): Main Exit
> Dummy-2(140470366000896): Finally: loop=140470323281760
>
> The finally block that I would have assumed to be executing in Thread-1
> is, at least according to logger, executing in a thread called "Dummy-2",
> but with thread id identical to "MainThread".
>
> I'm obviously abusing asyncio here, and this might not be an issue
> specific to asyncio (or even an issue at all), but I see similar behaviour
> when using aiohttp without hitting any RuntimeErrors, and if someone can
> explain what's actually going on here, I'd be very curious to find out!
>
> My guess, not knowing anything about the cpython thread execution model:
> At the time when the finally block actually runs, the MainThread is already
> gone, and a new "Dummy" thread is created (that recycles MainThread's id)
> to execute the "finally" block?
>
>
> Den tisdagen den 8:e april 2014 kl. 00:56:00 UTC+10 skrev Guido van Rossum:
>>
>> Code in one frame does not switch threads. However if you have loops on
>> different threads and schedule events between those that might happen (the
>> latest upstream Tulip has a guard agains this). According to threading.py,
>> Dummy threads are used to represent threads not started by that module (but
>> e.g. from C code).
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 5:17 AM, Lars Andersson <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Thanks Guido.
>>
>> All that mess manipulating the loop is the hoops I've had to jump through
>> to get the server to shut down without causing ResourceWarnings about open
>> sockets etc. I'll ask the aiohttp developers about a better way for the
>> http server to shut itself down...
>>
>> Still, is it possible that some code in a "finally" block running in
>> Thread-X gets run in a different thread ("In my case, thread "Dummy-X"),
>> after Thread-X has been terminated. I.e, why am I seeing messages from code
>> that should be executing in the http server thread being printed by a
>> thread named "Dummy-X"? (according to logging %(threadName)s )
>>
>>
>> Den måndagen den 7:e april 2014 kl. 17:28:41 UTC+10 skrev Guido van
>> Rossum:
>>
>> I can't really help you because I don't know aiohttp, but I note that you
>> have way too much code manipulating a main loop. I see three separate
>> loop.run_*() calls and a loop.stop() call that smells funny (because it's
>> called before the loop is even started). A better idiom would be to put all
>> this logic (whatever it is) in a couroutine and just run that single
>> coroutine, so you'd get something like this:
>>
>> def http_server_thread():
>>     loop.run_until_complete(my_main_coroutine())
>>     loop.close()
>>
>> @coroutine
>> my_main_coroutine():
>>     ...all the rest of your logic, using yield from to run coroutines...
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 6, 2014 at 7:48 PM, Lars Andersson <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm having some problems to properly shut down an aiohttp server running
>> in a separate thread...
>>
>> The following code is run as a separate python thread to start and stop
>> an aiohttp server:
>>
>> def http_server_thread()
>>    f = loop.create_server(aiohttp.server.ServerHttpProtocol, ...)
>>    srv = loop.run_until_complete(f)
>>    loop.run_forever()
>>    srv.close()
>>
>>    log.debug("waiting for server to exit...")
>>    loop.run_until_complete(srv.wait_closed())
>>    loop.stop()
>>    loop.run_forever()
>>
>>    loop.close()
>>    log.error("server thread EXIT")
>>
>> The server is configured to serve a predefined number of requests, then
>> shut it self down by calling self._loop.stop() from within it's request
>> handler coroutine (this is used for testing purposes)
>>
>> Accessing the http server running 'Thread-2' from MainThread generates
>> the following events:
>>
>> MainThread: send GET request to http server running in Thread-2
>>  Thread-2: REQ01: method = GET; path = /test; transport=139969646978160
>> (sock=14)
>> Thread-2: Max number or requests served, stopping (by calling
>> self._loop.stop())
>> Thread-2: New HttpServer Instance: config = {'maxRequests': 2}
>> Thread-2: waiting for server to exit...
>> Thread-2: closing loop 139969647425744
>> Thread-2: server thread EXIT
>> Dummy-9: Uncompleted request.
>>
>> The "Uncompleted request" message is printed by the aiohttp server code,
>> and must have been scheduled to run by the server running in "Thread-2",
>> but the final message is being printed from another thread, "Dummy-9".
>>
>> What is going on here? Is this something I should be worried about?
>>
>> Is it valid for a server to shut itself down by calling loop.stop() in a
>> request handler?
>>
>> In general, what's the recommended way to make sure everything in an
>> event loop has been completed before closing it?
>>
>> Sorry if my explanation of the problem wasn't very clear. I can try to
>> make a simpler reproduction code snippet if needed.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> --Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> --Guido van Rossum ( <http://python.org/~guido>
>>
>

-- 
--Guido van Rossum (on iPad)

Reply via email to