If you want to be able to control a thread like that from an atexit
callback, you need to create the thread as daemonised. Ie.
setDaemon(True) call on thread.
By default a thread will actually inherit the daemon flag from the
parent. For a command line Python where thread created from main
thread
Simon Sapin a écrit :
>Both of these callbacks could be called once per process (aka. space
>where requests share memory.)
Sorry, that should be once per interpreter.
--
Simon Sapin
___
Web-SIG mailing list
Web-SIG@python.org
Web SIG: http://www.p
for the record: http://bugs.python.org/issue14073
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 3:06 PM, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 3:02 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
>
>> ...
>> I find your example convincing. I think that's worth fixing in Python
>> (e.g. by
>> offering an atexit() method on Thread ob
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 3:02 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> ...
> I find your example convincing. I think that's worth fixing in Python
> (e.g. by
> offering an atexit() method on Thread objects). Perhaps you can open a bug?
>
Sure yeah -- Notice that I think it's still a good idea to provide the
Tarek Ziadé writes:
>
> here's a very simple demo: http://tarek.pastebin.mozilla.org/1489505
>
> There are two typos but the effect remains the same since you are locked
> before you reach those lines:
> - atexit call worker.stop() instead
> of worker.join()
> - in worker.stop(), it calls worke
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 2:46 PM, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
> here's a very simple demo: http://tarek.pastebin.mozilla.org/1489505
>
There are two typos but the effect remains the same since you are locked
before you reach those lines:
- atexit call worker.stop() instead of worker.join()
- in worker.
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 1:43 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> Tarek Ziadé writes:
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Graham Dumpleton
> wrote:
> > ...
> > > But I don't think you can guarantee that everything is still up in
> memory by
> > > the time atexit gets called,
> > > so you can't
Tarek Ziadé writes:
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Graham Dumpleton
wrote:
> ...
> > But I don't think you can guarantee that everything is still up in memory by
> > the time atexit gets called,
> > so you can't really call cleanup code there.
> The only thing which is done prior to at
On 21 February 2012 21:07, Simon Sapin wrote:
> Le 21/02/2012 10:31, Graham Dumpleton a écrit :
>
>> You do realise you are just reinventing context managers?
>>
>> With this 'application' do requests.
>
> Indeed. I didn’t want to go too far from the initial "shutdown function"
> proposal, but act
On 21 February 2012 21:41, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Graham Dumpleton
> wrote:
>>
>> ...
>>
>> > But I don't think you can guarantee that everything is still up in
>> > memory by
>> > the time atexit gets called,
>> > so you can't really call cleanup code there.
>
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 11:07 AM, Simon Sapin wrote:
> ...
> So a super-set of WSGI that is not just a gateway but also does process
> management?
>
>
> @contextlib.contextmanager
> def super_application(server_**infos):
>with contextlib.closing(open_**resource()) as resource:
>wsg
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Graham Dumpleton <
graham.dumple...@gmail.com> wrote:
> ...
> > But I don't think you can guarantee that everything is still up in
> memory by
> > the time atexit gets called,
> > so you can't really call cleanup code there.
>
> The only thing which is done prior
Le 21/02/2012 10:31, Graham Dumpleton a écrit :
> You do realise you are just reinventing context managers?
>
> With this 'application' do requests.
Indeed. I didn’t want to go too far from the initial "shutdown function"
proposal, but actual context managers would be better.
Le 21/02/2012 10
Le 21/02/2012 08:56, Simon Sapin a écrit :
Both of these callbacks could be called once per process (aka. space
where requests share memory.)
Sorry, that should be once per interpreter.
--
Simon Sapin
___
Web-SIG mailing list
Web-SIG@python.org
Web S
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 10:35 AM, Sylvain Hellegouarch wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 10:31 AM, Graham Dumpleton
> wrote:
>>
>> On 21 February 2012 20:26, Simon Sapin wrote:
>> > Le 21/02/2012 09:23, Tarek Ziadé a écrit :
>> >
>> >> Instead of having to provide two or three objects sepa
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 10:31 AM, Graham Dumpleton <
graham.dumple...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 21 February 2012 20:26, Simon Sapin wrote:
> > Le 21/02/2012 09:23, Tarek Ziadé a écrit :
> >
> >>Instead of having to provide two or three objects separately to a
> >>server, how about making the
On 21 February 2012 20:26, Simon Sapin wrote:
> Le 21/02/2012 09:23, Tarek Ziadé a écrit :
>
>> Instead of having to provide two or three objects separately to a
>> server, how about making the callbacks attributes of the application
>> callable?
>>
>>
>> can you show us an example ?
>
>
Le 21/02/2012 09:23, Tarek Ziadé a écrit :
Instead of having to provide two or three objects separately to a
server, how about making the callbacks attributes of the application
callable?
can you show us an example ?
Proposal:
Function-based:
def startup():
return op
On 21 February 2012 18:53, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 2:39 AM, Graham Dumpleton
> wrote:
>>
>> ...
>>
>> Overall the best chance of being able to do anything is relying on atexit.
>>
>> You are though at the mercy of the WSGI hosting mechanism shutting
>> down the process an
On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 5:03 PM, Tarek Ziadé wrote:
> Hello
>
> I need to be able to call a function when the web application shuts down
> (SIGTERM/SIGINT) -- the use case is to stop a background thread.
>
> I am currently using signals because it seems to be the most clean way to do
> this. atexi
>
>
> Yes, I also think shutting down the server is completely orthogonal to
> requests.
>
>
CherryPy is using an approach where, indeed, both are orthogonal. Tools
[1], which are similar to middlewares, are dealing with requests whereas
the CherryPy engine [2] is the basis upon which the whole ap
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 8:56 AM, Simon Sapin wrote:
> Le 21/02/2012 08:47, Tarek Ziadé a écrit :
>
> Yes, I also think shutting down the server is completely orthogonal to
>> requests.
>>
>
> If the shutdown callback is next to the application and not registered in
> a request, why not also have
22 matches
Mail list logo
