Develop Reference

python multiprocessing .join() deadlock depends on worker function

I am using the multiprocessing python library to spawn 4 Process() objects to parallelize a cpu intensive task. The task (inspiration and code from this great article) is to compute the prime factors for every integer in a list.
main.py:
import random
import multiprocessing
import sys
num_inputs = 4000
num_procs = 4
proc_inputs = num_inputs/num_procs
input_list = [int(1000*random.random()) for i in xrange(num_inputs)]
output_queue = multiprocessing.Queue()
procs = []
for p_i in xrange(num_procs):
print "Process [%d]"%p_i
proc_list = input_list[proc_inputs * p_i:proc_inputs * (p_i + 1)]
print " - num inputs: [%d]"%len(proc_list)
# Using target=worker1 HANGS on join
p = multiprocessing.Process(target=worker1, args=(p_i, proc_list, output_queue))
# Using target=worker2 RETURNS with success
#p = multiprocessing.Process(target=worker2, args=(p_i, proc_list, output_queue))
procs.append(p)
p.start()
for p in jobs:
print "joining ", p, output_queue.qsize(), output_queue.full()
p.join()
print "joined ", p, output_queue.qsize(), output_queue.full()
print "Processing complete."
ret_vals = []
while output_queue.empty() == False:
ret_vals.append(output_queue.get())
print len(ret_vals)
print sys.getsizeof(ret_vals)
Observation:
If the target for each process is the function worker1, for an input list larger than 4000 elements the main thread gets stuck on .join(), waiting for the spawned processes to terminate and never returns.
If the target for each process is the function worker2, for the same input list the code works just fine and the main thread returns.
This is very confusing to me, as the only difference between worker1 and worker2 (see below) is that the former inserts individual lists in the Queue whereas the latter inserts a single list of lists for each process.
Why is there deadlock using worker1 and not using worker2 target?
Shouldn't both (or neither) go beyond the Multiprocessing Queue maxsize limit is 32767?
worker1 vs worker2:
def worker1(proc_num, proc_list, output_queue):
'''worker function which deadlocks'''
for num in proc_list:
output_queue.put(factorize_naive(num))
def worker2(proc_num, proc_list, output_queue):
'''worker function that works'''
workers_stuff = []
for num in proc_list:
workers_stuff.append(factorize_naive(num))
output_queue.put(workers_stuff)
There are a lot of similar questions on SO, but I believe the core of this questions is clearly distinct from all of them.
Related Links:
https://sopython.com/canon/82/programs-using-multiprocessing-hang-deadlock-and-never-complete/
python multiprocessing issues
python multiprocessing - process hangs on join for large queue
Process.join() and queue don't work with large numbers
Python 3 Multiprocessing queue deadlock when calling join before the queue is empty
Script using multiprocessing module does not terminate
Why does multiprocessing.Process.join() hang?
When to call .join() on a process?
What exactly is Python multiprocessing Module's .join() Method Doing?

The docs warn about this:
Warning: As mentioned above, if a child process has put items on a queue (and it has not used JoinableQueue.cancel_join_thread), then that process will not terminate until all buffered items have been flushed to the pipe.
This means that if you try joining that process you may get a deadlock unless you are sure that all items which have been put on the queue have been consumed. Similarly, if the child process is non-daemonic then the parent process may hang on exit when it tries to join all its non-daemonic children.
While a Queue appears to be unbounded, under the covers queued items are buffered in memory to avoid overloading inter-process pipes. A process cannot end normally before those memory buffers are flushed. Your worker1() puts a lot more items on the queue than your worker2(), and that's all there is to it. Note that the number of items that can queued before the implementation resorts to buffering in memory isn't defined: it can vary across OS and Python release.
As the docs suggest, the normal way to avoid this is to .get() all the items off the queue before you attempt to .join() the processes. As you've discovered, whether it's necessary to do so depends in an undefined way on how many items have been put on the queue by each worker process.

Python: How to keep starting new parallel processes based on condition [duplicate]

I am reading various tutorials on the multiprocessing module in Python, and am having trouble understanding why/when to call process.join(). For example, I stumbled across this example:
nums = range(100000)
nprocs = 4
def worker(nums, out_q):
""" The worker function, invoked in a process. 'nums' is a
list of numbers to factor. The results are placed in
a dictionary that's pushed to a queue.
"""
outdict = {}
for n in nums:
outdict[n] = factorize_naive(n)
out_q.put(outdict)
# Each process will get 'chunksize' nums and a queue to put his out
# dict into
out_q = Queue()
chunksize = int(math.ceil(len(nums) / float(nprocs)))
procs = []
for i in range(nprocs):
p = multiprocessing.Process(
target=worker,
args=(nums[chunksize * i:chunksize * (i + 1)],
out_q))
procs.append(p)
p.start()
# Collect all results into a single result dict. We know how many dicts
# with results to expect.
resultdict = {}
for i in range(nprocs):
resultdict.update(out_q.get())
# Wait for all worker processes to finish
for p in procs:
p.join()
print resultdict
From what I understand, process.join() will block the calling process until the process whose join method was called has completed execution. I also believe that the child processes which have been started in the above code example complete execution upon completing the target function, that is, after they have pushed their results to the out_q. Lastly, I believe that out_q.get() blocks the calling process until there are results to be pulled. Thus, if you consider the code:
resultdict = {}
for i in range(nprocs):
resultdict.update(out_q.get())
# Wait for all worker processes to finish
for p in procs:
p.join()
the main process is blocked by the out_q.get() calls until every single worker process has finished pushing its results to the queue. Thus, by the time the main process exits the for loop, each child process should have completed execution, correct?
If that is the case, is there any reason for calling the p.join() methods at this point? Haven't all worker processes already finished, so how does that cause the main process to "wait for all worker processes to finish?" I ask mainly because I have seen this in multiple different examples, and I am curious if I have failed to understand something.

Try to run this:
import math
import time
from multiprocessing import Queue
import multiprocessing
def factorize_naive(n):
factors = []
for div in range(2, int(n**.5)+1):
while not n % div:
factors.append(div)
n //= div
if n != 1:
factors.append(n)
return factors
nums = range(100000)
nprocs = 4
def worker(nums, out_q):
""" The worker function, invoked in a process. 'nums' is a
list of numbers to factor. The results are placed in
a dictionary that's pushed to a queue.
"""
outdict = {}
for n in nums:
outdict[n] = factorize_naive(n)
out_q.put(outdict)
# Each process will get 'chunksize' nums and a queue to put his out
# dict into
out_q = Queue()
chunksize = int(math.ceil(len(nums) / float(nprocs)))
procs = []
for i in range(nprocs):
p = multiprocessing.Process(
target=worker,
args=(nums[chunksize * i:chunksize * (i + 1)],
out_q))
procs.append(p)
p.start()
# Collect all results into a single result dict. We know how many dicts
# with results to expect.
resultdict = {}
for i in range(nprocs):
resultdict.update(out_q.get())
time.sleep(5)
# Wait for all worker processes to finish
for p in procs:
p.join()
print resultdict
time.sleep(15)
And open the task-manager. You should be able to see that the 4 subprocesses go in zombie state for some seconds before being terminated by the OS(due to the join calls):
With more complex situations the child processes could stay in zombie state forever(like the situation you was asking about in an other question), and if you create enough child-processes you could fill the process table causing troubles to the OS(which may kill your main process to avoid failures).

At the point just before you call join, all workers have put their results into their queues, but they did not necessarily return, and their processes may not yet have terminated. They may or may not have done so, depending on timing.
Calling join makes sure that all processes are given the time to properly terminate.

I am not exactly sure of the implementation details, but join also seems to be necessary to reflect that a process has indeed terminated (after calling terminate on it for example). In the example here, if you don't call join after terminating a process, process.is_alive() returns True, even though the process was terminated with a process.terminate() call.

Python: Multithreading using join and Queue sometimes blocks forever

My code is as follows:
def PreDutyCycleSolve(self, procCount):
z = self.crystal.z
#D1 = np.empty(len(z))
#D2 = np.empty(len(z))
D1D2q = multiprocessing.Queue()
procs = []
for proc in range(procCount):
p = multiprocessing.Process(target=self.DutyCycleSolve,
args=(proc,
z[proc::procCount],
D1D2q))
procs.append(p)
for proc in procs:
proc.start()
for proc in procs:
proc.join()
while D1D2q.empty() is False:
x = D1D2q.get()
print x
I have a function, DutyCycleSolve, which get divided up and run from (in my case, four processes). The issue is, depending on the length of the array, z, sometimes, the code just gets stuck and never proceeds past proc.join. I've verified (by printing some text in self.DutyCycleSolve that self.DutyCycleSolve always returns and the process always exits from that function.
It appears that it exits from the function, and then (sometimes) gets stuck at join.
Any ideas why? I'm new to this.
Thanks.

From the docs:
Bear in mind that a process that has put items in a queue will wait
before terminating until all the buffered items are fed by the
“feeder” thread to the underlying pipe. [...]
This means that whenever you use a queue you need to make sure that
all items which have been put on the queue will eventually be removed
before the process is joined. Otherwise you cannot be sure that
processes which have put items on the queue will terminate. Remember
also that non-daemonic processes will be automatically be joined.
In other words, whenever you use queues, the right way to go is get() first, and then join(). See the docs for an example.

Output Queue of a Python multiprocessing is providing more results than expected

From the following code I would expect that the length of the resulting list were the same as the one of the range of items with which the multiprocess is feed:
import multiprocessing as mp
def worker(working_queue, output_queue):
while True:
if working_queue.empty() is True:
break #this is supposed to end the process.
else:
picked = working_queue.get()
if picked % 2 == 0:
output_queue.put(picked)
else:
working_queue.put(picked+1)
return
if __name__ == '__main__':
static_input = xrange(100)
working_q = mp.Queue()
output_q = mp.Queue()
for i in static_input:
working_q.put(i)
processes = [mp.Process(target=worker,args=(working_q, output_q)) for i in range(mp.cpu_count())]
for proc in processes:
proc.start()
for proc in processes:
proc.join()
results_bank = []
while True:
if output_q.empty() is True:
break
else:
results_bank.append(output_q.get())
print len(results_bank) # length of this list should be equal to static_input, which is the range used to populate the input queue. In other words, this tells whether all the items placed for processing were actually processed.
results_bank.sort()
print results_bank
Has anyone any idea about how to make this code to run properly?

This code will never stop:
Each worker gets an item from the queue as long as it is not empty:
picked = working_queue.get()
and puts a new one for each that it got:
working_queue.put(picked+1)
As a result the queue will never be empty except when the timing between the process happens to be such that the queue is empty at the moment one of the processes calls empty(). Because the queue length is initially 100 and you have as many processes as cpu_count() I would be surprised if this ever stops on any realistic system.
Well executing the code with slight modification proves me wrong, it does stop at some point, which actually surprises me. Executing the code with one process there seems to be a bug, because after some time the process freezes but does not return. With multiple processes the result is varying.
Adding a short sleep period in the loop iteration makes the code behave as I expected and explained above. There seems to be some timing issue between Queue.put, Queue.get and Queue.empty, although they are supposed to be thread-safe. Removing the empty test also gives the expected result (without ever getting stuck at an empty queue).
Found the reason for the varying behaviour. The objects put on the queue are not flushed immediately. Therefore empty might return False although there are items in the queue waiting to be flushed.
From the documentation:
Note: When an object is put on a queue, the object is pickled and a
background thread later flushes the pickled data to an underlying
pipe. This has some consequences which are a little surprising, but
should not cause any practical difficulties – if they really bother
you then you can instead use a queue created with a manager.
After putting an object on an empty queue there may be an infinitesimal delay before the queue’s empty() method returns False and get_nowait() can return without raising Queue.Empty.
If multiple processes are enqueuing objects, it is possible for the objects to be received at the other end out-of-order. However, objects enqueued by the same process will always be in the expected order with respect to each other.

When to call .join() on a process?

I am reading various tutorials on the multiprocessing module in Python, and am having trouble understanding why/when to call process.join(). For example, I stumbled across this example:
nums = range(100000)
nprocs = 4
def worker(nums, out_q):
""" The worker function, invoked in a process. 'nums' is a
list of numbers to factor. The results are placed in
a dictionary that's pushed to a queue.
"""
outdict = {}
for n in nums:
outdict[n] = factorize_naive(n)
out_q.put(outdict)
# Each process will get 'chunksize' nums and a queue to put his out
# dict into
out_q = Queue()
chunksize = int(math.ceil(len(nums) / float(nprocs)))
procs = []
for i in range(nprocs):
p = multiprocessing.Process(
target=worker,
args=(nums[chunksize * i:chunksize * (i + 1)],
out_q))
procs.append(p)
p.start()
# Collect all results into a single result dict. We know how many dicts
# with results to expect.
resultdict = {}
for i in range(nprocs):
resultdict.update(out_q.get())
# Wait for all worker processes to finish
for p in procs:
p.join()
print resultdict
From what I understand, process.join() will block the calling process until the process whose join method was called has completed execution. I also believe that the child processes which have been started in the above code example complete execution upon completing the target function, that is, after they have pushed their results to the out_q. Lastly, I believe that out_q.get() blocks the calling process until there are results to be pulled. Thus, if you consider the code:
resultdict = {}
for i in range(nprocs):
resultdict.update(out_q.get())
# Wait for all worker processes to finish
for p in procs:
p.join()
the main process is blocked by the out_q.get() calls until every single worker process has finished pushing its results to the queue. Thus, by the time the main process exits the for loop, each child process should have completed execution, correct?
If that is the case, is there any reason for calling the p.join() methods at this point? Haven't all worker processes already finished, so how does that cause the main process to "wait for all worker processes to finish?" I ask mainly because I have seen this in multiple different examples, and I am curious if I have failed to understand something.

Try to run this:
import math
import time
from multiprocessing import Queue
import multiprocessing
def factorize_naive(n):
factors = []
for div in range(2, int(n**.5)+1):
while not n % div:
factors.append(div)
n //= div
if n != 1:
factors.append(n)
return factors
nums = range(100000)
nprocs = 4
def worker(nums, out_q):
""" The worker function, invoked in a process. 'nums' is a
list of numbers to factor. The results are placed in
a dictionary that's pushed to a queue.
"""
outdict = {}
for n in nums:
outdict[n] = factorize_naive(n)
out_q.put(outdict)
# Each process will get 'chunksize' nums and a queue to put his out
# dict into
out_q = Queue()
chunksize = int(math.ceil(len(nums) / float(nprocs)))
procs = []
for i in range(nprocs):
p = multiprocessing.Process(
target=worker,
args=(nums[chunksize * i:chunksize * (i + 1)],
out_q))
procs.append(p)
p.start()
# Collect all results into a single result dict. We know how many dicts
# with results to expect.
resultdict = {}
for i in range(nprocs):
resultdict.update(out_q.get())
time.sleep(5)
# Wait for all worker processes to finish
for p in procs:
p.join()
print resultdict
time.sleep(15)
And open the task-manager. You should be able to see that the 4 subprocesses go in zombie state for some seconds before being terminated by the OS(due to the join calls):
With more complex situations the child processes could stay in zombie state forever(like the situation you was asking about in an other question), and if you create enough child-processes you could fill the process table causing troubles to the OS(which may kill your main process to avoid failures).

At the point just before you call join, all workers have put their results into their queues, but they did not necessarily return, and their processes may not yet have terminated. They may or may not have done so, depending on timing.
Calling join makes sure that all processes are given the time to properly terminate.

I am not exactly sure of the implementation details, but join also seems to be necessary to reflect that a process has indeed terminated (after calling terminate on it for example). In the example here, if you don't call join after terminating a process, process.is_alive() returns True, even though the process was terminated with a process.terminate() call.