Yes, it's not simple yet. We're slowly building threadsafe sockets, which will let us deal with actors from any thread.
On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 6:34 PM, Michal Vyskocil <[email protected]> wrote: > 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 > _______________________________________________ zeromq-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
