Persistent Threads & Synchronisation

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Matthew Tylee Atkinson

    #1

    Persistent Threads & Synchronisation

    I appear to be having some problems with the isAlive() method of
    detecting if a thread is alive/active/running or not. I'd be grateful
    for any advice.

    I have a visualisation program (which uses PyGame Extended [1]) that
    presents content to the user and is meant to download the next batch of
    content whilst the current one is being displayed. To achieve this, I
    created a thread to perform the downloading in the background (a class
    based on threading.Threa d).

    They way I want it to work is this: The downloading thread, when
    spawned, stays alive for the duration of the program. Occasionally the
    main program will call a function in it to download the data and save it
    as files on disk. Then, these files are loaded by the main thread.
    When this has happened, the main thread calls another function in the
    download thread to delete the temporary files. The same thing happens
    next time a download is needed, when the user is looking at some other
    content.

    My problem is this: the downloading thread only seems to execute code
    in a separate thread as long as the run() function (called by the
    start() function) is running. This is as per the documentation, of
    course. I am performing the download in the run() function, but the
    file cleanup is still done with a separate call. This actually does
    work, after the download is over, and run() has terminated, but I
    believe it isn't happening in a separate thread anymore (as previously I
    made a mistake and called run() directly, instead of start() and it
    blocked the main program).

    I have been using join() to wait until the download is complete at the
    point in the main program where it is absolutely necessary for the
    download to have finished. I'm trying to use the following code to
    restart the downloading thread when I next need to use it:

    if not self.preview_th read.isAlive():
    self.preview_th read.start()

    Unfortunately, isAlive() sometimes returns False when the thread is
    actually still running. This means that my code crashes out, on the
    assertion in threading.Threa d that self.__started is False. The
    documentation [2] explains that the issue of threads being ``alive''
    has ``intentionally been left vague'', which doesn't inspire confidence
    :-S.

    To work around this problem, I was thinking of doing this:

    class PreviewThread(t hreading.Thread ):
    . . .
    def run(self):
    self.download_d ata()
    while not self.temp_files _cleaned:
    pass
    return
    . . .
    def cleanup(self):
    . . .
    self.temp_files _cleaned = True

    This should allow the thread to remain alive until after the download
    *and* cleanup have been completed, so that I can be sure it's safe to
    restart it when I next need to download more data.

    My ultimate question: is this the right way to do things? I don't like
    the idea of making a loop such as that in the proposed run() function
    above, it seems inefficient. I am also concerned that it won't let me
    call other functions in the thread, perhaps.

    I did wonder about using a Condition, but that seems to be more suited
    for synchronising between threads, which isn't really the issue here
    (and thus it seems like overkill for solving the problem of replacing
    that loop with something more efficient, though could be a possibility,
    I suppose).

    It seems I'm missing something big and possibly obvious about how to
    make threads persistent. I would like to know ``the right way'' to do
    it and would really appreciate some advice on the subject.

    Many thanks in advance!


    [1] http://codereactor.net/projects/pygext/
    [2] http://docs.python.org/lib/thread-objects.html
    --
    Matthew Tylee Atkinson <matthew@agrip. org.uk>
  • Matthew Tylee Atkinson

    #2
    Re: Persistent Threads &amp; Synchronisation

    On Sun, 26 Nov 2006 19:38:20 +0000, Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:
    Methods defined in a thread class but called from outside the
    running thread run in the environment of the caller, not as part of the
    thread (and if the method manipulates state you may run into conflicts).
    Thanks very much; I'd arrived at this conclusion, but didn't know how to fix the
    situation.
    You CAN NOT restart threads... You have to recreate the whole thread
    object. .start() can only be called ONCE on any thread object.
    That clears a lot up.
    clean(), next(), and quit() will be called by the main thread as
    needed. The "preview thread" does nothing except wait for a command on
    the queue, then performs the operation requested. The main thread will
    have to ensure it calls the next() and clean() methods in proper
    sequence.
    Excellent; thanks for the example.
    (How the main thread is informed of completion is something I
    don't know from your post).
    Currently, I am using locks (as in threading.Lock( )).
    If you /need/ to have overlapped downloads and cleanups, you will
    need TWO threads, and much more complex interlocking.
    I don't, but thanks for the advice.

    best regards,


    --
    Matthew Tylee Atkinson <matthew@agrip. org.uk>

    Comment

    • Paul McGuire

      #3
      Re: Persistent Threads &amp; Synchronisation

      "Matthew Tylee Atkinson" <matthew@agrip. org.ukwrote in message
      news:ekbtqe$74s $2@news.freedom 2surf.net...
      >I appear to be having some problems with the isAlive() method of
      detecting if a thread is alive/active/running or not. I'd be grateful
      for any advice.
      >
      Your comments about restartable threads got me thinking about generators.
      While this does not strictly do threading, this little example uses a list
      of generators, which save their state and pick up where they left off.
      (Also, look into simpy, which has a similar concept, but much more
      infrastructure support).

      -- Paul


      class Processor(objec t):
      def __init__(self, id_):
      self.id = id_
      self.finished = False

      def __str__(self):
      return "Processor: %s" % self.id

      def run(self):
      def runImpl_(self):
      runGen = self.runImpl()
      while not self.finished:
      try:
      yield self.id,runGen. next()
      except StopIteration:
      self.finished = True
      return runImpl_(self)

      def runImpl(self):
      times = 0
      while times < self.id:
      times += 1
      yield times


      import random

      class RandomProcessor (Processor):
      # just implement runImpl in subclass
      def runImpl(self):
      times = 0
      while times < self.id:
      times += 1
      yield random.random()

      def main():
      # create list of processors
      procList =[ (random.choice([True,False]) and
      Processor(i) or RandomProcessor (i))
      for i in range(10)]
      procs = [ (p,p.run()) for p in procList ]

      # context switch loop
      while procs:

      # cycle through all processors
      for p in procs:
      try:
      ret = p[1].next()
      print ret
      except StopIteration:
      pass

      # remove any processors that have finished
      procs = [ p for p in procs if not p[0].finished ]

      main()



      Comment

      Working...