I wanted to run a function in parallel to the main program in Python. Suppose I have a speech recognition function. I want it to run in the background and interrupt the main program if a particular utterance is heard. But at the same time, I have other tasks to perform. So, the speech recognition should work as a separate process and may be call a function when a command is heard.
I tried the python multiprocessing module, the thread module and the threading module. But all of these required me to wait until the process or thread is finished. What I want is something that will allow me to run functions in the background. They must call some callback function if a specific event occurs.
I hope I will find an effective way of doing this.
I tried the threading module. The code looked like this (pseudocode):
def detected(text):
commands = 'a list of commands'
if text in commands:
#call some function according to the command
def speech_recognition():
#while True:
#If speech detected:
#record it
#process it and covert it to text
#if text is a specified command:
#call the detected(text) function with the recognized text as argument
import threading as t
pr = t.Thread(target=speech_recognition)
pr.start()
#from here starts the main program that does some other functions that
#doesn't need to be mentioned here.
But this doesn't work. The speech recognition runs for a few seconds and then just quits. No Exceptions raised, no system exits, nothing. Its the same when I try the multiprocessing and thread modules.
I don't know how CPU-intense speech recognition is, but I am pretty sure the problem you are describing is best solved with maximum decoupling between entities, i.e. separation in processes. Simple scenario: one of your processes runs your "main program", the other process is entirely responsible for speech recognition. You then implement a communication protocol between those processes. The "main program" still needs some kind of event system and asynchronous execution based on threading, because it needs to be able to listen and immediately react to events sent by the speech-reco-process. Hence, a working model would contain:
one main process which should not be CPU-bound
one child process, spawned via multiprocessing, handling speech recognition
a communication protocol enabling the transmission of data/events between main and child process
one additional thread in the main process that waits for events sent by the child process and makes sure that the main program reacts correspondingly
Main and child process run concurrently as scheduled by the operating system. Of course this works best on a system with at least two CPU cores. In the main process, the main thread and the other thread to not really run synchronously -- only one thread can run at a time due to CPython's global interpreter lock (GIL).
The communication between main process and child process can be implemented with basic multiprocessing tools such as Queue or Pipe.
As you realize, you need to invest some serious thought into a problem like this. Don't try to solve this quick&dirty or just by trial and error. You need to make sure you understand your self-developed architecture.
Just use threading and pass your thread either a function handle to call when it has data ready or the application handle in the case of GUI applications so that the thread can create an event with the data attached.
Related
Kind all, I'm really new to python and I'm facing a task which I can't completely grasp.
I've created an interface with Tkinter which should accomplish a couple of apparently easy feats.
By clicking a "Start" button two threads/processes will be started (each calling multiple subfunctions) which mainly read data from a serial port (one port per process, of course) and write them to file.
The I/O actions are looped within a while loop with a very high counter to allow them to go onward almost indefinitely.
The "Stop" button should stop the acquisition and essentially it should:
Kill the read/write Thread
Close the file
Close the serial port
Unfortunately I still do not understand how to accomplish point 1, i.e.: how to create killable threads without killing the whole GUI. Is there any way of doing this?
Thank you all!
First, you have to choose whether you are going to use threads or processes.
I will not go too much into differences, google it ;) Anyway, here are some things to consider: it is much easier to establish communication between threads than betweeween processes; in Python, all threads will run on the same CPU core (see Python GIL), but subprocesses may use multiple cores.
Processes
If you are using subprocesses, there are two ways: subprocess.Popen and multiprocessing.Process. With Popen you can run anything, whereas Process gives a simpler thread-like interface to running python code which is part of your project in a subprocess.
Both can be killed using terminate method.
See documentation for multiprocessing and subprocess
Of course, if you want a more graceful exit, you will want to send an "exit" message to the subprocess, rather than just terminate it, so that it gets a chance to do the clean-up. You could do that e.g. by writing to its stdin. The process should read from stdin and when it gets message "exit", it should do whatever you need before exiting.
Threads
For threads, you have to implement your own mechanism for stopping, rather than using something as violent as process.terminate().
Usually, a thread runs in a loop and in that loop you check for a flag which says stop. Then you break from the loop.
I usually have something like this:
class MyThread(Thread):
def __init__(self):
super(Thread, self).__init__()
self._stop_event = threading.Event()
def run(self):
while not self._stop_event.is_set():
# do something
self._stop_event.wait(SLEEP_TIME)
# clean-up before exit
def stop(self, timeout):
self._stop_event.set()
self.join(timeout)
Of course, you need some exception handling etc, but this is the basic idea.
EDIT: Answers to questions in comment
thread.start_new_thread(your_function) starts a new thread, that is correct. On the other hand, module threading gives you a higher-level API which is much nicer.
With threading module, you can do the same with:
t = threading.Thread(target=your_function)
t.start()
or you can make your own class which inherits from Thread and put your functionality in the run method, as in the example above. Then, when user clicks the start button, you do:
t = MyThread()
t.start()
You should store the t variable somewhere. Exactly where depends on how you designed the rest of your application. I would probably have some object which hold all active threads in a list.
When user clicks stop, you should:
t.stop(some_reasonable_time_in_which_the_thread_should_stop)
After that, you can remove the t from your list, it is not usable any more.
First you can use subprocess.Popen() to spawn child processes, then later you can use Popen.terminate() to terminate them.
Note that you could also do everything in a single Python thread, without subprocesses, if you want to. It's perfectly possible to "multiplex" reading from multiple ports in a single event loop.
I started doing a simple command line chat, then I learned about tkinter and added GUI, then I added voice support.
As soon as I learned that python threads suck, I started using Processes and pipes for inter-process communication.
The main process, launches 3 processes to deal with: GUI, sound input, sound output.
The main process connects to the server, sends/receives messages (updating the GUI).
The GUI process runs the tkinter loop and communicates with the main process when needed.
The way I call procedures in another process is by sending, through a pipe, the name of the method and arguments for it, which the receiving process will execute. There is no return, only calls.
I would like know the wrongs of this architecture and alternatives.
What design patterns exist for this problem?
I am developing a small Python program for the Raspberry Pi that listens for some events on a Zigbee network.
The way I've written this is rather simplisic, I have a while(True): loop checking for a Uniquie ID (UID) from the Zigbee. If a UID is received it's sent to a dictionary containing some callback methods. So, for instance, in the dictionary the key 101 is tied to a method called PrintHello().
So if that key/UID is received method PrintHello will be executed - pretty simple, like so:
if self.expectedCallBacks.has_key(UID) == True:
self.expectedCallBacks[UID]()
I know this approach is probably too simplistic. My main concern is, what if the system is busy handling a method and the system receives another message?
On an embedded MCU I can handle easily with a circuler buffer + interrupts but I'm a bit lost with it comes to doing this with a RPi. Do I need to implement a new thread for the Zigbee module that basically fills a buffer that the call back handler can then retrieve/read from?
I would appreciate any suggestions on how to implement this more robustly.
Threads can definitely help to some degree here. Here's a simple example using a ThreadPool:
from multiprocessing.pool import ThreadPool
pool = ThreadPool(2) # Create a 2-thread pool
while True:
uid = zigbee.get_uid()
if uid in self.expectedCallbacks:
pool.apply_async(self.expectedCallbacks[UID])
That will kick off the callback in a thread in the thread pool, and should help prevent events from getting backed up before you can send them to a callback handler. The ThreadPool will internally handle queuing up any tasks that can't be run when all the threads in the pool are already doing work.
However, remember that Raspberry Pi's have only one CPU core, so you can't execute more than one CPU-based operation concurrently (and that's even ignoring the limitations of threading in Python caused by the GIL, which is normally solved by using multiple processes instead of threads). That means no matter how many threads/processes you have, only one can get access to the CPU at a time. For that reason, you probably don't want more than one thread actually running the callbacks, since as you add more you're just going to slow things down, due to the OS needing to constantly switch between threads.
I have a python program which operates an external program and starts a timeout thread. Timeout thread should countdown for 10 minutes and if the script, which operates the external program isn't finished in that time, it should kill the external program.
My thread seems to work fine on the first glance, my main script and the thread run simultaneously with no issues. But if a pop up window appears in the external program, it stops my scripts, so that even the countdown thread stops counting, therefore totally failing it's job.
I assume the issue is that the script calls a blocking function in API for the external program, which is blocked by the pop up window. I understand why it blocks my main program, but don't understand why it blocks my countdown thread. So, one possible solution might be to run a separate script for the countdown, but I would like to keep it as clean as possible and it seems really messy to start a script for this.
I have searched everywhere for a clue, but I didn't find much. There was a reference to the gevent library here:
background function in Python
, but it seems like such a basic task, that I don't want to include external library for this.
I also found a solution which uses a windows multimedia timer here, but I've never worked with this before and am afraid the code won't be flexible with this. Script is Windows-only, but it should work on all Windows from XP on.
For Unix I found signal.alarm which seems to do exactly what I want, but it's not available for Windows. Any alternatives for this?
Any ideas on how to work with this in the most simplified manner?
This is the simplified thread I'm creating (run in IDLE to reproduce the issue):
import threading
import time
class timeToKill():
def __init__(self, minutesBeforeTimeout):
self.stop = threading.Event()
self.countdownFrom = minutesBeforeTimeout * 60
def startCountdown(self):
self.countdownThread= threading.Thread(target=self.countdown, args=(self.countdownFrom,))
self.countdownThread.start()
def stopCountdown(self):
self.stop.set()
self.countdownThread.join()
def countdown(self,seconds):
for second in range(seconds):
if(self.stop.is_set()):
break
else:
print (second)
time.sleep(1)
timeout = timeToKill(1)
timeout.startCountdown()
raw_input("Blocking call, waiting for input:\n")
One possible explanation for a function call to block another Python thread is that CPython uses global interpreter lock (GIL) and the blocking API call doesn't release it (NOTE: CPython releases GIL on blocking I/O calls therefore your raw_input() example should work as is).
If you can't make the buggy API call to release GIL then you could use a process instead of a thread e.g., multiprocessing.Process instead of threading.Thread (the API is the same). Different processes are not limited by GIL.
For quick and dirty threading, I usually resort to subprocess commands. it is quite robust and os independent. It does not give as fine grained control as the thread and queue modules but for external calls to programs generally does nicely. Note the shell=True must be used with caution.
#this can be any command
p1 = subprocess.Popen(["python", "SUBSCRIPTS/TEST.py", "0"], shell=True)
#the thread p1 will run in the background - asynchronously. If you want to kill it after some time, then you need
#here do some other tasks/computations
time.sleep(10)
currentStatus = p1.poll()
if currentStatus is None: #then it is still running
try:
p1.kill() #maybe try os.kill(p1.pid,2) if p1.kill does not work
except:
#do something else if process is done running - maybe do nothing?
pass
Python have been really bumpy for me, because the last time I created a GUI client, the client seems to hang when spawning a process, calling a shell script, and calling outside application.
This have been my major problem with Python since then, and now I'm in a new project, can someone give me pointers, and a word of advice in order for my GUI python application to still be interactive when spawning another process?
Simplest (not necessarily "best" in an abstract sense): spawn the subprocess in a separate thread, communicating results back to the main thread via a Queue.Queue instance -- the main thread must periodically check that queue to see if the results have arrived yet, but periodic polling isn't hard to arrange in any event loop.
Your main GUI thread will freeze if you spawn off a process and wait for it to completely. Often, you can simply use subprocess and poll it now and then for completion rather than waiting for it to finish. This will keep your GUI from freezing.