I'm extending socketserver.ThreadingMixIn in Python 3.4 to build my own threaded server while keeping the original callbacks overwintered only for logging porpoises.
The activation and creation is very simple and according to python documentation the problem i'm having is to stop that server with server.shutdown(). It frizzes and doesn't exit. I need way to shutdown that server without using ctrl-c because it will also involve some GUI to that server.
The basic server:
class ServerBasic(socketserver.ThreadingMixIn,socketserver.TCPServer):
logging.basicConfig(level=logging.DEBUG,format='%(name)s: %(message)s',)
def __init__(self, log_name,server_address, handler_class=ThreadedRequestHandler):
self.logger = logging.getLogger(log_name)
self.logger.debug('__init__')
socketserver.TCPServer.__init__(self, server_address, handler_class)
return
def server_activate(self):
self.logger.debug('server_activate')
socketserver.TCPServer.server_activate(self)
return
def serve_forever(self):
self.logger.debug('waiting for request')
self.logger.info('Handling requests, press <Ctrl-C> to quit')
while True:
self.handle_request()
return
The extending class:
class ManagerServer(PIRServerBasic):
def __init__(self, log_name, handler_class=T_ManagerRequestHandler):
self.tup_socket = (ipAddress, WELCOME_PORT) # tuple of the address and port
self.log_name = log_name
return ServerBasic.__init__(self, log_name, self.tup_socket, handler_class=handler_class)
And here how it all created and running:
o_serverManager = ManagerServer('Manager_Server', T_ManagerRequestHandler)
t_managerServer = threading.Thread(target=o_serverManager.serve_forever)
t_managerServer.daemon = True
t_managerServer.start()
sleep(15)
o_serverManager.shutdown()
After the shutdown command the program is stuck.
In your overwrite of the serve_forever method, you have removed the condition that breaks the while loop on a shutdown request. The original method looks like:
def serve_forever(self, poll_interval=0.5):
"""Handle one request at a time until shutdown.
Polls for shutdown every poll_interval seconds. Ignores
self.timeout. If you need to do periodic tasks, do them in
another thread.
"""
self.__is_shut_down.clear()
try:
while not self.__shutdown_request:
r, w, e = _eintr_retry(select.select, [self], [], [],
poll_interval)
if self in r:
self._handle_request_noblock()
finally:
self.__shutdown_request = False
self.__is_shut_down.set()
You need to implement a similar system in your overwrite, to look for a set __shutdown_request flag and take the appropriate action. This also requires that your handler is non-blocking.
Related
I have written a python script that idles waiting for gmail to push a notification indicating that an email has been received. Then the contents are parsed and a database is searched, then database data is emailed back to the original sender.
Currently once an email is received, the script cannot process another email until the script has emailed back. I am wondering if there is a way for the script to be continually listening for an email. As at this point in time if two emails are received at similar times the second one will not be processed.
I think multi-threading might be a solution but I am not sure. Possibly create a new thread for the processEmail.py section of code below?
Sorry if I have explained badly, I am struggling to explain this adequately, feel free to ask for more information.
EDIT: Instead of down voting me could you help me by commenting telling me what more information I should include?
EDIT 2: Here is a code example, I am trying to have the ability to still listen for an email while an email is being processed in processEmail.py
import imaplib2
import time
import subprocess
from threading import *
from subprocess import call
import processEmail
class Idler(object):
def __init__(self, conn):
self.thread = Thread(target=self.idle)
self.M = conn
self.event = Event()
def start(self):
self.thread.start()
def stop(self):
self.event.set()
def join(self):
self.thread.join()
def idle(self):
while True:
if self.event.isSet():
return
self.needsync = False
def callback(args):
if not self.event.isSet():
self.needsync = True
self.event.set()
self.M.idle(callback=callback)
self.event.wait()
if self.needsync:
self.event.clear()
self.dosync()
def dosync(self):
print "An email has been received, please wait...\n"
self.execute()
def execute(self):
processEmail.main()
M = imaplib2.IMAP4_SSL("imap.gmail.com")
M.login("email_address","email_pass")
M.select("Folder")
idler = Idler(M)
idler.start()
x = False
while not x: time.sleep(0.1)
You can directly inherit from threading.Thread and override its run method:
class SomeTask(threading.Thread):
def run(self):
# Will be executed in separate thread
Start the thread via its start method.
Communication between threads should be handled via queues.
I am implementing a WebSockets server in Tornado 3.2. The client connecting to the server won't be a browser.
For cases in which there is back-and-forth communication between server and client, I would like to add a max. time the server will wait for a client response before closing the connection.
This is roughly what I've been trying:
import datetime
import tornado
class WSHandler(WebSocketHandler):
def __init__(self, *args, **kwargs):
super().__init__(*args, **kwargs)
self.timeout = None
def _close_on_timeout(self):
if self.ws_connection:
self.close()
def open(self):
initialize()
def on_message(self, message):
# Remove previous timeout, if one exists.
if self.timeout:
tornado.ioloop.IOLoop.instance().remove_timeout(self.timeout)
self.timeout = None
if is_last_message:
self.write_message(message)
self.close()
else:
# Add a new timeout.
self.timeout = tornado.ioloop.IOLoop.instance().add_timeout(
datetime.timedelta(milliseconds=1000), self._close_on_timeout)
self.write_message(message)
Am I being a klutz and is there a much simpler way of doing this? I can't even seem to schedule a simple print statement via add_timeout above.
I also need some help testing this. This is what I have so far:
from tornado.websocket import websocket_connect
from tornado.testing import AsyncHTTPTestCase, gen_test
import time
class WSTests(AsyncHTTPTestCase):
#gen_test
def test_long_response(self):
ws = yield websocket_connect('ws://address', io_loop=self.io_loop)
# First round trip.
ws.write_message('First message.')
result = yield ws.read_message()
self.assertEqual(result, 'First response.')
# Wait longer than the timeout.
# The test is in its own IOLoop, so a blocking sleep should be okay?
time.sleep(1.1)
# Expect either write or read to fail because of a closed socket.
ws.write_message('Second message.')
result = yield ws.read_message()
self.assertNotEqual(result, 'Second response.')
The client has no problem writing to and reading from the socket. This is presumably because the add_timeout isn't firing.
Does the test need to yield somehow to allow the timeout callback on the server to run? I would have thought not since the docs say the tests run in their own IOLoop.
Edit
This is the working version, per Ben's suggestions.
import datetime
import tornado
class WSHandler(WebSocketHandler):
def __init__(self, *args, **kwargs):
super().__init__(*args, **kwargs)
self.timeout = None
def _close_on_timeout(self):
if self.ws_connection:
self.close()
def open(self):
initialize()
def on_message(self, message):
# Remove previous timeout, if one exists.
if self.timeout:
tornado.ioloop.IOLoop.current().remove_timeout(self.timeout)
self.timeout = None
if is_last_message:
self.write_message(message)
self.close()
else:
# Add a new timeout.
self.timeout = tornado.ioloop.IOLoop.current().add_timeout(
datetime.timedelta(milliseconds=1000), self._close_on_timeout)
self.write_message(message)
The test:
from tornado.websocket import websocket_connect
from tornado.testing import AsyncHTTPTestCase, gen_test
import time
class WSTests(AsyncHTTPTestCase):
#gen_test
def test_long_response(self):
ws = yield websocket_connect('ws://address', io_loop=self.io_loop)
# First round trip.
ws.write_message('First message.')
result = yield ws.read_message()
self.assertEqual(result, 'First response.')
# Wait a little more than the timeout.
yield gen.Task(self.io_loop.add_timeout, datetime.timedelta(seconds=1.1))
# Expect either write or read to fail because of a closed socket.
ws.write_message('Second message.')
result = yield ws.read_message()
self.assertEqual(result, None)
The timeout-handling code in your first example looks correct to me.
For testing, each test case gets its own IOLoop, but there is only one IOLoop for both the test and anything else it runs, so you must use add_timeout instead of time.sleep() here as well to avoid blocking the server.
Ey Ben, I know this question was long ago resolved, but I wanted to share with any user reading this the solution I made for this.
It's basically based on yours, but it solves the problem from an external Service that can be easily integrated within any websocket using composition instead of inheritance:
class TimeoutWebSocketService():
_default_timeout_delta_ms = 10 * 60 * 1000 # 10 min
def __init__(self, websocket, ioloop=None, timeout=None):
# Timeout
self.ioloop = ioloop or tornado.ioloop.IOLoop.current()
self.websocket = websocket
self._timeout = None
self._timeout_delta_ms = timeout or TimeoutWebSocketService._default_timeout_delta_ms
def _close_on_timeout(self):
self._timeout = None
if self.websocket.ws_connection:
self.websocket.close()
def refresh_timeout(self, timeout=None):
timeout = timeout or self._timeout_delta_ms
if timeout > 0:
# Clean last timeout, if one exists
self.clean_timeout()
# Add a new timeout (must be None from clean).
self._timeout = self.ioloop.add_timeout(
datetime.timedelta(milliseconds=timeout), self._close_on_timeout)
def clean_timeout(self):
if self._timeout is not None:
# Remove previous timeout, if one exists.
self.ioloop.remove_timeout(self._timeout)
self._timeout = None
In order to use the service, itś as easy as create a new TimeoutWebService instance (optionally with the timeout in ms, as well as the ioloop where it should be executed) and call the method ''refresh_timeout'' to either set the timeout for the first time or reset an already existing timeout, or ''clean_timeout'' to stop the timeout service.
class BaseWebSocketHandler(WebSocketHandler):
def prepare(self):
self.timeout_service = TimeoutWebSocketService(timeout=(1000*60))
## Optionally starts the service here
self.timeout_service.refresh_timeout()
## rest of prepare method
def on_message(self):
self.timeout_service.refresh_timeout()
def on_close(self):
self.timeout_service.clean_timeout()
Thanks to this approach, you can control when exactly and under which conditions you want to restart the timeout which might differ from app to app. As an example you might only want to refresh the timeout if user acomplish X conditions, or if the message is the expected one.
I hope ppl enjoy this solution !
Maybe I'm missing something here in the asynchronous designs of Twisted, but I can't seem to find a way to call the sendMessage() method "externaly". By this I mean, sending messages without being solely at the callback methods of Twisted/AutobahnWebsockets (like at onOpen or when receiving data from server at onMessage())
Of course I could launch a thread and call my_protocol_instance.sendMessage("hello") but that would defeat every purpose of the asynchronous design right?
In a concrete example, I need to have a top wrapper class which opens the connection and manages it, and whenever I need I call my_class.send_my_toplevel_message(msg). How can I implement this?
Hope I've been clear on my explanation.
Thanks
Why do you need a thread to launch protocolInstance.sendMessage() ?
This can be done in a normal reactor loop.
The core of a twisted is reactor and it gives a much easier look at things when you consider twisted itself reactive - meaning it does something as a reaction (response) to something else.
Now I assume that the thread you are talking about, also gets created and made in calling sendMessage because of certain events or activity or status. I can hardly imagine a case where you would just need to send a message out of the blue without any reason to react.
If however there is an event which should trigger sendMessage, there is no need to invoke that in thread: just use twisted mechanisms for catching that event and then calling sendMessage from that particular event's callback.
Now on to your concrete example: can you specify what "whenever I need" means exactly in the context of this question? An input from another connection? An input from the user? Looping activity?
I managed to implement what I needed by running Twisted in another thread, keeping my program free to run and allowing it to trigger send data in Twisted with reactor.callFromThread().
What do you think?
# ----- twisted ----------
class _WebSocketClientProtocol(WebSocketClientProtocol):
def __init__(self, factory):
self.factory = factory
def onOpen(self):
log.debug("Client connected")
self.factory.protocol_instance = self
self.factory.base_client._connected_event.set()
class _WebSocketClientFactory(WebSocketClientFactory):
def __init__(self, *args, **kwargs):
WebSocketClientFactory.__init__(self, *args, **kwargs)
self.protocol_instance = None
self.base_client = None
def buildProtocol(self, addr):
return _WebSocketClientProtocol(self)
# ------ end twisted -------
class BaseWBClient(object):
def __init__(self, websocket_settings):
self.settings = websocket_settings
# instance to be set by the own factory
self.factory = None
# this event will be triggered on onOpen()
self._connected_event = threading.Event()
# queue to hold not yet dispatched messages
self._send_queue = Queue.Queue()
self._reactor_thread = None
def connect(self):
log.debug("Connecting to %(host)s:%(port)d" % self.settings)
self.factory = _WebSocketClientFactory(
"ws://%(host)s:%(port)d" % self.settings,
debug=True)
self.factory.base_client = self
c = connectWS(self.factory)
self._reactor_thread = threading.Thread(target=reactor.run,
args=(False,))
self._reactor_thread.daemon = True
self._reactor_thread.start()
def send_message(self, body):
if not self._check_connection():
return
log.debug("Queing send")
self._send_queue.put(body)
reactor.callFromThread(self._dispatch)
def _check_connection(self):
if not self._connected_event.wait(timeout=10):
log.error("Unable to connect to server")
self.close()
return False
return True
def _dispatch(self):
log.debug("Dispatching")
while True:
try:
body = self._send_queue.get(block=False)
except Queue.Empty:
break
self.factory.protocol_instance.sendMessage(body)
def close(self):
reactor.callFromThread(reactor.stop)
I've made a server based on cherrypy but I have a repetitive task which takes a long time (more than a minute) to run. This is all fine until I need to shut down the server, then I am waiting forever for the threads to finish.
I was wondering how you'd detect a cherrypy shutdown inside the client thread so that the thread could abort when the server is shutting down.
I'm after something like this:
class RootServer:
#cherrypy.expose
def index(self, **keywords):
for i in range(0,1000):
lengthyprocess(i)
if server_is_shutting_down():
return
You can inspect the state directly:
if cherrypy.engine.state != cherrypy.engine.states.STARTED:
return
Or, you can register a listener on the 'stop' channel:
class RootServer:
def __init__(self):
cherrypy.engine.subscribe('start', self.start)
cherrypy.engine.subscribe('stop', self.stop)
def start(self):
self.running = True
def stop(self):
self.running = False
#cherrypy.expose
def index(self, **keywords):
for i in range(0,1000):
lengthyprocess(i)
if not self.running:
return
The latter is especially helpful if you also want to have the lengthyprocess start (or perform some preparation) when the server starts up, rather than upon a request.
How can I call shutdown() in a SocketServer after receiving a certain message "exit"? As I know, the call to serve_forever() will block the server.
Thanks!
Use the source, Luke!
Excerpt from SocketServer.py:
def serve_forever(self, poll_interval=0.5):
"""Handle one request at a time until shutdown.
Polls for shutdown every poll_interval seconds. Ignores
self.timeout. If you need to do periodic tasks, do them in
another thread.
"""
self.__is_shut_down.clear()
try:
while not self.__shutdown_request:
# XXX: Consider using another file descriptor or
# connecting to the socket to wake this up instead of
# polling. Polling reduces our responsiveness to a
# shutdown request and wastes cpu at all other times.
r, w, e = select.select([self], [], [], poll_interval)
if self in r:
self._handle_request_noblock()
finally:
self.__shutdown_request = False
self.__is_shut_down.set()
def shutdown(self):
"""Stops the serve_forever loop.
Blocks until the loop has finished. This must be called while
serve_forever() is running in another thread, or it will
deadlock.
"""
self.__shutdown_request = True
self.__is_shut_down.wait()
No the serve_forever is checking a flag on a regular basis (by default 0.5 sec). Calling shutdown will raise this flag and cause the serve_forever to end.