Python: sharing message between processes - python

I've been searching for answer to that problem for few hours but couldn't solve it so I have to post here this question, I'm sure it's trivial.
The project I work with has many classes and threads and I'm adding small classes to it. Those classes are executed in different threads with project's engine but I need them to synchronize between themselves - that is class A should be able to send a message to class B. They are also in different modules.
EDIT2: there is a new explanation of this question: look at the bottom.
I am really very beginner in python and I tried to solve this by sharing queue object (Queue.Queue()) and examining it's content in endless loops, I made very simple module with this object and methods get and put:
messenger module:
import Queue
MessageQueue = Queue.Queue()
def GetMessage():
return MessageQueue.get()
def PutMessage(message):
MessageQueue.put(message)
return
and use it in two different classes (import messenger), but since it's not global variable, I assume that 'MessageQueue' object has different instances in different classes. Because those classes seems working on different queues.
How to synchronize two classes with such object between (maybe there is a pretier way instead just making this queue global)?
EDIT1 - here are classes:
class A:
from utils import messenger as m
class Foo():
[...]
def foo():
[...]
m.put(message)
class B:
from utils import messenger
class Bar():
[...]
def bar():
[...]
while True:
print(str(m.get()))
EDIT2: Since I understand my problem a bit better now, here is an update:
Both classes are run as distinct programs in different processes (what may explain why the are not sharing global variables :)).
So the problem remains: how to synchronize between two different programs? The only solution I think of is to make a file on a disc and read it between processes, but it seems very unreliable (locks etc.) and slow.
Can you suggest me different approach?

Ok, I solved the problem using Zero MQ library.
Node A, the publisher:
import zmq, time
from datetime import datetime
context = zmq.Context()
#create this node as publisher
socket = context.socket(zmq.PUB)
socket.bind("tcp://*:25647")
for i in range(300):
message = ("%d, %d" % (1, i))
print str(datetime.now().time()) + "> sending: " + message
socket.send(message)
time.sleep(1)
Node B, the receiver:
import zmq, time
from datetime import datetime
context = zmq.Context()
socket = context.socket(zmq.SUB)
socket.connect("tcp://localhost:25647")
#filter message for particular subscriber ('1')
socket.setsockopt(zmq.SUBSCRIBE, '1')
while True:
message = socket.recv()
print(str(datetime.now().time()) + "> received: " + str(message))
This setting does what I wanted, that is, it conveys signal from one program to another and it does it in quite good time (this very simple message, tuple of two integers, is sent in around 0.5 ms).
Two important things:
subscribe have to be "authorized" to receive message - it is done by filtering the first value of message
publisher is "binding", subscriber "connecting" to socket

The way to share any object among multiple instances (of different classes, of the same class, whatever) without making it global is the same: Pass the object into each instance's constructor. For example:
class Foo(object):
def __init__(self, m):
self.m = m
# ...
# ...
def foo(self):
# ...
self.m.put(message)
# ...
# ...
class Bar(object):
def __init__(self, m):
self.m = m
self.foo = Foo(m)
# ...
# ...
def foo(self):
# ...
self.m.put(message)
# ...
# ...
m = Queue.Queue()
bar1 = Bar(m)
bar2 = Bar(m)
Now bar1, bar2, bar1.foo, and bar2.foo all have the same m object.

Related

Detach COM events using pywin32

Is it possible to detach a specific event after attaching it to a COM object?
For example, how to deregister the ClassOfHandlers in the following snippet:
from win32com.client import WithEvents
# ...
class ClassOfHandlers():
def OnStart(self):
print("Start observed")
class AnotherClassOfHandlers():
def OnStart(self):
print("Start observed from another")
WithEvents(client, ClassOfHandlers)
# ...
WithEvents(client, AnotherClassOfHandlers)
# ...
# Deregister `ClassOfHandlers`
As a variation on the OP's answer, which avoids a static member variable, it is worth remembering that WithEvents() returns an instance of the handler class.
from win32com.client import WithEvents
def MyOnStart():
print("Start observed")
def MySecondOnStart():
print("Start observed from another")
class ClassOfHandlers():
def __init__(self):
self._fn = MyOnStart
def setStartFunction(self,fn):
self._fn = fn
def OnStart(self):
self._fn()
handler = WithEvents(client, ClassOfHandlers)
#then later
handler.setStartFunction(MySecondOnStart)
Hence you can re-use the handler class for a different client.
Alternatively you could try opening an issue here and maybe the developers can advise on whether they expose the IConnectionPoint::Unadvise() function which would be needed behind the scenes to switch event handlers (I think).
Edit
Based on DS_London's answer we could benefit from WithEvents return, thus the combined solution would look like
from win32com.client import WithEvents
def MyOnStart():
print("Start observed")
def MySecondOnStart():
print("Start observed from another")
class ClassOfHandlers():
def __init__(self):
self._onStarts = []
# self._onStops = []
# ... add a list of functions for each event type
# the following 3 methods are implemented for each event type
def attachStart(self, fn):
self._onStarts.append(fn)
def detachStart(self, fn):
self._onStarts.remove(fn)
def OnStart(self):
for fn in self._onStarts:
fn()
# Always at the beginning
handler = WithEvents(client, ClassOfHandlers)
handler.attachStart(MyOnStart)
# ...
handler.attachStart(MySecondOnStart)
# ...
handler.detachStart(MyOnStart)
Limitation
If support for multiple clients is needed and thus threading is used, this edit won't work, and it would be needed to use the original answer's approach.
The cause: one needs to pass the ClassOfHandlers to the thread runnable*, however the thread runnable would PumpWaitingMessages() till interrupted, thus it won't be able to return the client handler back, preventing us from being able to detach/attach further functions while waiting for messages.
* PumpWaitingMessages() requires that it runs on the same thread that connected the ClassOfHandlers to the client, thus we can't create the client handler out of the thread then send it into the thread runnable.
Following is a snippet that shows this scenario:
def threadRunnable(client, eventsClass, controller):
pythoncom.CoInitializeEx(pythoncom.COINIT_MULTITHREADED)
# Connect the custom events
# The connection needs to be done inside the same thread for PumpWaitingMessages
handler = WithEvents(client, eventsClass)
if controller == None:
print("no control was provided")
controller = { "sleep_time": 1, "running_flag": True}
# With this while we won't be able to return the handler
while controller["running_flag"]:
pythoncom.PumpWaitingMessages()
time.sleep(controller["sleep_time"])
pythoncom.CoUninitialize()
def connectEvents(client, eventsClass, controller=None, runnable=threadRunnable):
flusher = Thread(target=runnable, args=(client,eventsClass,controller))
flusher.daemon = True
flusher.start()
def main():
controller = { "sleep_time": 1, "running_flag": True}
connectEvents(client, ClassOfHandlers, controller)
Original
I'm now able to achieve the desired behavior, by attaching a single permanent observer class and managing the events myself.
For example:
from win32com.client import WithEvents
# ...
class ClassOfHandlers():
OnStarts = []
def OnStart(self):
for handler in ClassOfHandlers.OnStarts:
handler()
def MyOnStart():
print("Start observed")
def MySecondOnStart():
print("Start observed from another")
# Always at the beginning
WithEvents(client, ClassOfHandlers)
ClassOfHandlers.OnStarts.append(MyOnStart)
# ...
ClassOfHandlers.OnStarts.append(MySecondOnStart)
# ...
ClassOfHandlers.OnStarts.remove(MyOnStart)
Hint:
The class variable OnStarts shall be changed to an instance variable if the class represents an instantiable COM object, to allow having an instance of the ClassOfHandlers (each instance having a different handler list) for each instantiated COM object.
One also needs to ensure that WithEvents is called only once for each COM object instance.

How to verify when an unknown object created by the code under test was called as expected (pytest) (unittest)

I have some code that creates instances from a list of classes that is passed to it. This cannot change as the list of classes passed to it has been designed to be dynamic and chosen at runtime through configuration files). Initialising those classes must be done by the code under test as it depends on factors only the code under test knows how to control (i.e. it will set specific initialisation args). I've tested the code quite extensively through running it and manually trawling through reams of output. Obviously I'm at the point where I need to add some proper unittests as I've proven my concept to myself. The following example demonstrates what I am trying to test:
I would like to test the run method of the Foo class defined below:
# foo.py
class Foo:
def __init__(self, stuff):
self._stuff = stuff
def run():
for thing in self._stuff:
stuff = stuff()
stuff.run()
Where one (or more) files would contain the class definitions for stuff to run, for example:
# classes.py
class Abc:
def run(self):
print("Abc.run()", self)
class Ced:
def run(self):
print("Ced.run()", self)
class Def:
def run(self):
print("Def.run()", self)
And finally, an example of how it would tie together:
>>> from foo import Foo
>>> from classes import Abc, Ced, Def
>>> f = Foo([Abc, Ced, Def])
>>> f.run()
Abc.run() <__main__.Abc object at 0x7f7469f9f9a0>
Ced.run() <__main__.Abc object at 0x7f7469f9f9a1>
Def.run() <__main__.Abc object at 0x7f7469f9f9a2>
Where the list of stuff to run defines the object classes (NOT instances), as the instances only have a short lifespan; they're created by Foo.run() and die when (or rather, sometime soon after) the function completes. However, I'm finding it very tricky to come up with a clear method to test this code.
I want to prove that the run method of each of the classes in the list of stuff to run was called. However, from the test, I do not have visibility on the Abc instance which the run method creates, therefore, how can it be verified? I can't patch the import as the code under test does not explicitly import the class (after all, it doesn't care what class it is). For example:
# test.py
from foo import Foo
class FakeStuff:
def run(self):
self.run_called = True
def test_foo_runs_all_stuff():
under_test = Foo([FakeStuff])
under_test.run()
# How to verify that FakeStuff.run() was called?
assert <SOMETHING>.run_called, "FakeStuff.run() was not called"
It seems that you correctly realise that you can pass anything into Foo(), so you should be able to log something in FakeStuff.run():
class Foo:
def __init__(self, stuff):
self._stuff = stuff
def run(self):
for thing in self._stuff:
stuff = thing()
stuff.run()
class FakeStuff:
run_called = 0
def run(self):
FakeStuff.run_called += 1
def test_foo_runs_all_stuff():
under_test = Foo([FakeStuff, FakeStuff])
under_test.run()
# How to verify that FakeStuff.run() was called?
assert FakeStuff.run_called == 2, "FakeStuff.run() was not called"
Note that I have modified your original Foo to what I think you meant. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

python threading.local() in different module

I am trying to pass data in threading.local() to functions in different module.
Code is something like this:
other_module.py:
import threading
# 2.1
ll = threading.local()
def other_fn():
# 2.2
ll = threading.local()
v = getattr(ll, "v", None)
print(v)
main_module.py:
import threading
import other_module
# 1.1
ll = threading.local()
def main_fn(v):
# 1.2
ll = threading.local()
ll.v = v
other_fn()
for i in [1,2]:
t = threading.Thread(target=main_fn, args=(i,))
t.start()
But none of combinations 1.x - 2.x not working for me.
I have found similar question - Access thread local object in different module - Python but reply, marked as answer not working for me too if print_message function located in different module.
Is it possible to pass thread local data between modules without passing it as function argument?
In a similar situation I ended up doing the following in a separate module:
import threading
from collections import defaultdict
tls = defaultdict(dict)
def get_thread_ctx():
""" Get thread-local, global context"""
return tls[threading.get_ident()]
This essentially creates a global variable called tls. Then each thread (based on its identity) gets a key in the global dict. I handle that also as a dict. Example:
class Test(Thread):
def __init__(self):
super().__init__()
# note: we cannot initialize thread local here, since thread
# is not running yet
def run(self):
# Get thread context
tmp = get_thread_ctx()
# Create an app-specific entry
tmp["probe"] = {}
self.ctx = tmp["probe"]
while True:
...
Now, in a different module:
def get_thread_settings():
ctx = get_thread_ctx()
probe_ctx = ctx.get("probe", None)
# Get what you need from the app-specific region of this thread
return probe_ctx.get("settings", {})
Hope it helps the next one looking for something similar

Having the class handle pickle

I am changing some code to spin up VMs in ec2 instead of openstack. Main starts a thread per VM, and then various modules perform tasks on these VM. Each thread controls it's own VM. So, instead of either having to add parameters to all of the downstream modules to look up information, or having to change all of the code to unpickle the class instance that created the vm, I am hoping that I can have the class itself decide whether to start a new VM or return the existing pickle. That way the majority of the code wont need to be altered.
This is the general idea, and closest I have gotten to getting it to work:
import os
import sys
import pickle
if sys.version_info >= (2, 7):
from threading import current_thread
else:
from threading import currentThread as current_thread
class testA:
def __init__(self, var="Foo"):
self.class_pickle_file = "%s.p" % current_thread().ident
if os.path.isfile(self.class_pickle_file):
self.load_self()
else:
self.var = var
pickle.dump(self, open(self.class_pickle_file, "wb"))
def test_method(self):
print self.var
def load_self(self):
return pickle.load(open(self.class_pickle_file, "rb"))
x = testA("Bar")
y = testA()
y.test_method()
But that results in: NameError: global name 'var' is not defined
But, If I do y = pickle.load(open("140355004004096.p", "rb")) it works just fine. So the data IS getting in there by storing self inside the class, it's a problem of getting the class to return the pickle instead of itself...
Any ideas? Thanks.
It looks to me like you create a file named by the current thread's ident, then you instantiate another TestA object using the same thread (!!same ident!!), so it checks for a pickle file (and finds it, that's bad), then self.var never gets set.
In test_method, you check for a variable that was never set.
Run each item in its own thread to get different idents, or ensure you set self.var no matter what.

Dynamic traits do not survive pickling

traits_pickle_problem.py
from traits.api import HasTraits, List
import cPickle
class Client(HasTraits):
data = List
class Person(object):
def __init__(self):
self.client = Client()
# dynamic handler
self.client.on_trait_event(self.report,'data_items')
def report(self,obj,name,old,new):
print 'client added-- ' , new.added
if __name__ == '__main__':
p = Person()
p.client.data = [1,2,3]
p.client.data.append(10)
cPickle.dump(p,open('testTraits.pkl','wb'))
The above code reports a dynamic trait. Everything works as expected in this code. However, using a new python process and doing the following:
>>> from traits_pickle_problem import Person, Client
>>> p=cPickle.load(open('testTraits.pkl','rb'))
>>> p.client.data.append(1000)
causes no report of the list append. However, re-establishing the listener separately as follows:
>>> p.client.on_trait_event(p.report,'data_items')
>>> p.client.data.append(1000)
client added-- [1000]
makes it work again.
Am I missing something or does the handler need to be re-established in __setstate__ during the unpickling process.
Any help appreciated. This is for Python 2.7 (32-bit) on windows with traits version 4.30.
Running pickletools.dis(cPickle.dumps(p)), you can see the handler object being referenced:
...
213: c GLOBAL 'traits.trait_handlers TraitListObject'
...
But there's no further information on how it should be wired to the report method. So either the trait_handler doesn't pickle itself out properly, or it's an ephemeral thing like a file handle that can't be pickled in the first place.
In either case, your best option is to overload __setstate__ and re-wire the event handler when the object is re-created. It's not ideal, but at least everything is contained within the object.
class Person(object):
def __init__(self):
self.client = Client()
# dynamic handler
self.client.on_trait_event(self.report, 'data_items')
def __setstate__(self, d):
self.client = d['client']
self.client.on_trait_event(self.report, 'data_items')
def report(self, obj, name, old, new):
print 'client added-- ', new.added
Unpickling the file now correctly registers the event handler:
p=cPickle.load(open('testTraits.pkl','rb'))
p.client.data.append(1000)
>>> client added-- [1000]
You might find this talk Alex Gaynor did at PyCon interesting. It goes into the high points of how pickling work under the hood.
EDIT - initial response used on_trait_change - a typo that appears to work. Changed it back to on_trait_event for clarity.
I had the same problem but came around like this: Imaging I want to pickle only parts of a quiet big class and some of the objects has been set so transient=True so they're not pickled because there is nothing important to save, e.g.
class LineSpectrum(HasTraits):
andor_cam = Instance(ANDORiKonM, transient=True)
In difference to objects which should be saved, e.g.
spectrometer = Instance(SomeNiceSpectrometer)
In my LineSpectrum class, I have a
def __init__(self, f):
super(LineSpectrum, self).__init__()
self.load_spectrum(f)
def __setstate__(self, state): # WORKING!
print("LineSpectrum: __setstate__ with super(...) call")
self.__dict__.update(state)
super(LineSpectrum, self).__init__() # this has to be done, otherwise pickled sliders won't work, also first update __dict__!
self.from_pickle = True # is not needed by traits, need it for myself
self.andor_cam = ANDORiKonM(self.filename)
self.load_spectrum(self.filename)
In my case, this works perfectly - all sliders are working, all values set at the time the object has been pickled are set back.
Hope this works for you or anybody who's having the same problem. Got Anaconda Python 2.7.11, all packages updated.
PS: I know the thread is old, but didn't want to open a new one just for this.

Categories

Resources