subprocess call avoid stopping after error - python

I call a program a subprocess.call() in a for-loop and then it does something. However, after the called program crashes (no, I can't avoid that) the python script terminates.
The code:
with open("runtests.output", "w") as output:
for i in range(1,5):
for j in range(2,5):
subprocess.call(["runprogram", "with", "arguments"])
output.write(str(i) + str(j))
output.write(str(resource.getrusage(resource.RUSAGE_CHILDREN)))
output.write("\n")
In this case, runprogram with arguments fails at some point, i.e. at the third loop in the inner for-loop, and then the whole script stops. I, however, want the script to just continue calling subrpocesses until all the loops have looped.
So how to avoid this behavior?
EDIT:
Tried
try:
call and writes here
except:
print "Ohai"
The actual output is two times an ABORT which is negated, which are in the main process of runprogram, but then an ABORT comes which is from a child process of runprogram and then the whole script fails. Maybe that has something to do with it?
Also, "Ohai" isn't printed...

Related

Python multiprocessing process hangs at the end of it

I have a python script driving me crazy.
Right now i have a infinite loop that checks a data and get into a function in a specific situation.
while true:
time.sleep(1)
peso = getPeso()
if peso > 900:
processo = multiprocessing.Process(target=processo_automatico)
processo.start()
processo.join()
andare() #this is where it should go after the process.
The function works a lot of times but nondeterministically it hangs at the end of the process (literally finish and hangs there forever. How do i know this? i tried with logs).
So at the beginning I tried to terminate it with exit codes:
processo.join(timeout=10)
if processo.exitcode is None:
errore_cicalino() #this is just a warning for me
processo.kill()
elif processo.exitcode != 0:
errore_cicalino()
processo.kill()
but this never worked. NEVER.
So i tried without the join(). Tried with is_alive().
time.sleep(10)
if processo.is_alive():
processo.terminate()
errore_cicalino()
and even like this, it never entered this if.
This is driving me crazy, i accept the fact that the process could fail but, after the timeout, i should be able to terminate it and carry on with the script.
The script is running on a Raspberry Pi 4 2 GB.
Any idea?
Minimal example:
while True:
time.sleep(10)
processo = multiprocessing.Process(target=processo_automatico)
processo.start()
processo.join()
code randomly hangs at the end of the started process and cannot terminate in any way.
processo_automatico() is a function where the script get a picture from a camera and upload it in a DB thanks to another module.
def processo_automatico():
now = str(datetime.now())
now = now.replace(":", "-")
foto = CAMERA.read_camera()
cv2.imwrite("/var/www/html/" + now + ".png", foto)
DB.insert("/var/www/html/" + now + ".png", peso)
They don't create exceptions and i already tried to add to the end of the function a log info(executed even when the code hangs)
Solved.
What was that?
Well, my focus was on the end of the process while the issue was right at the start.
See the function getPeso()? That one just gets values from the serial.
After a few hours of getting those values the raspberry py just starts to see random values and you gotta reboot to fix it.
I wasn't prepared for that. My function just became a recursive infinite function with no break.
My tip, do not use infinite cycles except if you really need to or at least think if it could get stuck somewhere and check it.

Python/Discord.py - How do I stop all running code but not stop the program?

I'm making a Discord bot with a lot of commands that take a while to finish (like loops) so I'd like to also have a command that stops any actively running code. I've tried sys.exit but I don't want to have to restart the program each time before it will take another input. Anyone know what I can do?
It will depend on the way your code is formatted, but you will probably want to use functions that utilize boolean or return statements:
def foo():
if end_this:
return
# stuff
If you have some tracking boolean end_this that is set to True, the function foo() will not execute everything below. Alternatively, you could use a while-loop with a break in your code:
def foo():
while True: # runs forever unless ended
# stuff
break
Now, foo() will continue indefinitely until the break statement is reached. An if-statement can enclose the break, setting some logic on when the break occurs. Again, this may require a main() function to handle the calls and ends of your previous functions, but it would allow following code/functions to execute.

How can I handle abnormal exit error, for example, performing a function before it exit abnormally?

During a long repeated Monte Carlo runs, for example, I want to terminate my program before it exits normally (Like for 10000MC runs, I want to terminate when 5000 runs have been finished. But I still want to get the results of the previous 5000 runs.), or it ran into some unexpected error, it exits abruptly with losing previous results. Is it possible to perform a function (like saving some results/variables I want) before it exits abnormally in PYTHON so that I can keep already obtained results?
You can wrap your code in try/finally, and save the obtained results to a file in the finally statement. This will execute the code in finally whether or not your code exited abnormally. An abnormal exit includes the case when you intentionally interrupt the script midway execution by pressing CTRL+C (which raises KeyboardInterrupt exception).
import pickle
def MC_SIMULATION():
# your code
return something
results = []
i = 0
try:
for _ in range(10000):
results.append(MC_SIMULATION())
i += 1
finally: #runs whether or not an exception was raised in the try statement
with open("MC_"+str(i)+".pickle",'w') as f:
pickle.dump(results, f)
Now you can either wait for the script to finish and save results, or interrupt it in the middle with CTRL+C and the results obtained so far will still be saved.

taking multiline input with sys.stdin

I have the following function:
def getInput():
# define buffer (list of lines)
buffer = []
run = True
while run:
# loop through each line of user input, adding it to buffer
for line in sys.stdin.readlines():
if line == 'quit\n':
run = False
else:
buffer.append(line.replace('\n',''))
# return list of lines
return buffer
which is called in my function takeCommands(), which is called to actually run my program.
However, this doesn't do anything. I'm hoping to add each line to an array, and once a line == 'quit' it stops taking user input. I've tried both for line in sys.stdin.readlines() and for line sys.stdin, but neither of them register any of my input (I'm running it in Windows Command Prompt). Any ideas? Thanks
So, took your code out of the function and ran some tests.
import sys
buffer = []
while run:
line = sys.stdin.readline().rstrip('\n')
if line == 'quit':
run = False
else:
buffer.append(line)
print buffer
Changes:
Removed the 'for' loop
Using 'readline' instead of 'readlines'
strip'd out the '\n' after input, so all processing afterwards is much easier.
Another way:
import sys
buffer = []
while True:
line = sys.stdin.readline().rstrip('\n')
if line == 'quit':
break
else:
buffer.append(line)
print buffer
Takes out the 'run' variable, as it is not really needed.
I'd use itertools.takewhile for this:
import sys
import itertools
print list(itertools.takewhile(lambda x: x.strip() != 'quit', sys.stdin))
Another way to do this would be to use the 2-argument iter form:
print list(iter(raw_input,'quit'))
This has the advantage that raw_input takes care of all of the line-buffering issues and it will strip the newlines for you already -- But it will loop until you run out of memory if the user forgets to add a quit to the script.
Both of these pass the test:
python test.py <<EOF
foo
bar
baz
quit
cat
dog
cow
EOF
There are multiple separate problems with this code:
while run:
# loop through each line of user input, adding it to buffer
for line in sys.stdin.readlines():
if line == 'quit':
run = False
First, you have an inner loop that won't finish until all lines have been processed, even if you type "quit" at some point. Setting run = False doesn't break out of that loop. Instead of quitting as soon as you type "quit", it will keep going until it's looked at all of the lines, and then quit if you typed "quit" at any point.
You can fix this one pretty easily by adding a break after the run = False.
But, with or without that fix, if you didn't type "quit" during that first time through the outer loop, since you've already read all input, there's nothing else to read, so you'll just keep running an empty inner loop over and over forever that you can never exit.
You have a loop that means "read and process all the input". You want to do that exactly once. So, what should the outer loop be? It should not be anyway; the way to do something once is to not use a loop. So, to fix this one, get rid of run and the while run: loop; just use the inner loop.
Then, if you type "quit", line will actually be "quit\n", because readlines does not strip newlines.
You fix this one by either testing for "quit\n", or stripping the lines.
Finally, even if you fix all of these problems, you're still waiting forever before doing anything. readlines returns a list of lines. The only way it can possibly do that is by reading all of the lines that will ever be on stdin. You can't even start looping until you've read all those lines.
When standard input is a file, that happens when the file ends, so it's not too terrible. But when standard input is the Windows command prompt, the command prompt never ends.* So, this takes forever. You don't get to start processing the list of lines, because it takes forever to wait for the list of lines.
The solution is to not use readlines(). Really, there is never a good reason to call readlines() on anything, stdin or not. Anything that readlines works on is already an iterable full of lines, just like the list that readlines would give you, except that it's "lazy": it can give you the lines one at a time, instead of waiting and giving you all of them at once. (And even if you really need the list, just do list(f) instead of f.readlines().)
So, instead of for line in sys.stdin.readlines():, just do for line in sys.stdin: (Or, better, replace the explicit loop completely and use a sequence of iterator transformations, as in mgilson's answer.)
The fixes JBernardo, Wing Tang Wong, etc. proposed are all correct, and necessary. The reason none of them fixed your problems is that if you have 4 bugs and fix 1, your code still doesn't work. That's exactly why "doesn't work" isn't a useful measure of anything in programming, and you have to debug what's actually going wrong to know whether you're making progress.
* I lied a bit about stdin never being finished. If you type a control-Z (you may or may not need to follow it with a return), then stdin is finished. But if your assignment is to make it quit as soon as the user types "quit"< turning in something that only quits when the user types "quit" and then return, control-Z, return again probably won't be considered successful.

Piping in Python 2.6 to a file with while loop

I'm completely new to Python piping but I think it's the answer to my problem. I've got a file cleverbot.py that takes endless input from raw_input and prints out the results to the command line. This is done while staying in a while loop the whole time, and when you say "bye" the script exits.
Now, can someone give me an example where I can pipe inputs to this script and then receive the output, without it ending the loop? The loop acts as a session and it's important that the script continues to run constantly inside this while loop while being able to have inputs piped to it.
Here is a snippet of the code. For anyone that wants to get the full thing its the pycleverbot library.
def main():
import sys
cb = Session()
q = ''
while q != 'bye':
try:
q = raw_input("> ")
except KeyboardInterrupt:
print
sys.exit()
print cb.Ask(q)
The cb = Session() can't be recreated at all after it's first made. That's why the while loop is in place. I lack the necessary logic to see a way of not using a while loop.
Hope this makes sense, thanks.
The trick is to not use a while loop in the first place.
for line in sys.stdin:
if line.lower().strip() == 'bye':
break
sys.stdout.write(do_something(line))
sys.stdout.flush()

Categories

Resources