Hi, In czmq things are stopped when zsys_interrupted is 1. This apply for malamute as well. It is modified by default signal handler, so simple ctrl-c ends your client cleanly, even if in recv call.
I assume that the default signal handler of camp is not setup correctly in your case. Consult zsys man page for details. Dne 3. 2. 2016 6:07 PM napsal uživatel "Aaron Sokoloski" < [email protected]>: > Hi folks, > > I'm trying to make the python malamute binding as easy to use as > possible. I'm having trouble making sure that everything gets cleaned up > correctly on exit, though, when the client is running in a thread other > than the main thread, and the client is blocking on a call to recv (aka > mlm_client_recv). > > So far, I have something that works, but isn't ideal, which is to create a > "shutdown" inproc socket pair whose only purpose is to notify the recieving > end when the process gets interrupted, using a python signal handler. Then > the application code can poll both that receiving socket and the malamute > client msgpipe, and exit the receive loop when it gets a message on the > shutdown socket. > > Here's the gist of that approach: > https://gist.github.com/asokoloski/02ab5affeca9be2bebdb > > Although conceptually simple, this is a bit awkward, especially for > application code that may want to create multiple clients. So what I'm > trying to do is figure out a way to make everything get cleaned up > automatically. Ideally, what would happen is that the zactor thread > finishes whatever it was doing and the zactor gets destroyed, then an > exception is raised in the python thread. > > Destroying the zactor from another thread is a big no-no, because zeromq > sockets are not thread safe, correct? So the thread that is doing the recv > has to wake up. We could terminate the context directly, which would make > the recv return, but that's quite abrupt, and doesn't give the zactor a > chance to shut down. We could make the recv call poll the socket > internally, periodically waking up to check if it's been interrupted, but > that seems gross, especially as it would have to poll rather quickly -- the > shutdown timeout is 200ms. > > One options is to take the same approach of having a shutdown socket pair, > but try to hide it inside the python library code. Maybe the application > code just calls recv(), but inside recv() the object polls the two > sockets. But that doesn't really play nicely in the case where, say, the > application code wants to poll the malamute client and some other sockets > at the same time. It's doable, but feels complicated. > > So I have lots of questions now. Is my reasoning above valid? Is this > sort of thing a problem with pure c programs as well? Does it even matter > if the zactor shuts down cleanly, aside from avoiding ugly warnings? Is > there another approach that I haven't even considered? > > If there isn't a better way to do this, I can bite the bullet and make the > application code handle it, but it sure feels a bit lacking. > > Thanks in advance for any help anyone can offer, > Aaron > > _______________________________________________ > zeromq-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev > >
_______________________________________________ zeromq-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
