I am a newbie in Python. I recently tried to use Python script to call a console exe which is a process need long time. I will allow the exe being called as many times as the CPU can permit. And when the exe has finish its job. It should release the CPU to other new jobs. So I think I may need the multiple process control mechanism.
Since multiprocessing can only call python callable function. It can not directly call the console exe. I wrapped the subprocess.Popen(cmd) in a python function. However, after I did so, I found that before multiprocessing.Process.start() is used. The exe has already started. And problem is before it finish what it is doing (need long time), it does not return me the control. The program is freezed to wait. That is not what I want.
I am posting the codes as below:
import sys
import os
import multiprocessing
import subprocess
def subprocessExe(cmd):
return subprocess.call(cmd, shell=False, stdout=subprocess.PIPE, \
stderr=subprocess.PIPE,creationflags=0x08000000)
if __name__ == '__main__':
p = multiprocessing.Process(target=self.subprocessExe(exeFileName))
p.start()
print p, p.is_alive()
Thank you for your time!
You're calling subprocessExec when you create the multiprocessing.Process object. You should instead do this:
p = multiprocessing.Process(target=subprocessExec, args=(exeFileName,))
And then it should work.
There are number of things that are wrong in your test case. The following work for me:
import multiprocessing, subprocess
def subprocessExe(cmd):
subprocess.call([cmd], shell=False)
p = multiprocessing.Process(target=subprocessExe, args=('/full/path/to/script.sh',))
p.start()
OR
subprocess.call([cmd], shell=True)
p = multiprocessing.Process(target=subprocessExe, args=('script.sh',))
OR
subprocess.Popen([cmd], shell=True, stdout=subprocess.PIPE, \
stderr=subprocess.PIPE)
Related
I'm trying to port a shell script to the much more readable python version. The original shell script starts several processes (utilities, monitors, etc.) in the background with "&". How can I achieve the same effect in python? I'd like these processes not to die when the python scripts complete. I am sure it's related to the concept of a daemon somehow, but I couldn't find how to do this easily.
While jkp's solution works, the newer way of doing things (and the way the documentation recommends) is to use the subprocess module. For simple commands its equivalent, but it offers more options if you want to do something complicated.
Example for your case:
import subprocess
subprocess.Popen(["rm","-r","some.file"])
This will run rm -r some.file in the background. Note that calling .communicate() on the object returned from Popen will block until it completes, so don't do that if you want it to run in the background:
import subprocess
ls_output=subprocess.Popen(["sleep", "30"])
ls_output.communicate() # Will block for 30 seconds
See the documentation here.
Also, a point of clarification: "Background" as you use it here is purely a shell concept; technically, what you mean is that you want to spawn a process without blocking while you wait for it to complete. However, I've used "background" here to refer to shell-background-like behavior.
Note: This answer is less current than it was when posted in 2009. Using the subprocess module shown in other answers is now recommended in the docs
(Note that the subprocess module provides more powerful facilities for spawning new processes and retrieving their results; using that module is preferable to using these functions.)
If you want your process to start in the background you can either use system() and call it in the same way your shell script did, or you can spawn it:
import os
os.spawnl(os.P_DETACH, 'some_long_running_command')
(or, alternatively, you may try the less portable os.P_NOWAIT flag).
See the documentation here.
You probably want the answer to "How to call an external command in Python".
The simplest approach is to use the os.system function, e.g.:
import os
os.system("some_command &")
Basically, whatever you pass to the system function will be executed the same as if you'd passed it to the shell in a script.
I found this here:
On windows (win xp), the parent process will not finish until the longtask.py has finished its work. It is not what you want in CGI-script. The problem is not specific to Python, in PHP community the problems are the same.
The solution is to pass DETACHED_PROCESS Process Creation Flag to the underlying CreateProcess function in win API. If you happen to have installed pywin32 you can import the flag from the win32process module, otherwise you should define it yourself:
DETACHED_PROCESS = 0x00000008
pid = subprocess.Popen([sys.executable, "longtask.py"],
creationflags=DETACHED_PROCESS).pid
Use subprocess.Popen() with the close_fds=True parameter, which will allow the spawned subprocess to be detached from the Python process itself and continue running even after Python exits.
https://gist.github.com/yinjimmy/d6ad0742d03d54518e9f
import os, time, sys, subprocess
if len(sys.argv) == 2:
time.sleep(5)
print 'track end'
if sys.platform == 'darwin':
subprocess.Popen(['say', 'hello'])
else:
print 'main begin'
subprocess.Popen(['python', os.path.realpath(__file__), '0'], close_fds=True)
print 'main end'
Both capture output and run on background with threading
As mentioned on this answer, if you capture the output with stdout= and then try to read(), then the process blocks.
However, there are cases where you need this. For example, I wanted to launch two processes that talk over a port between them, and save their stdout to a log file and stdout.
The threading module allows us to do that.
First, have a look at how to do the output redirection part alone in this question: Python Popen: Write to stdout AND log file simultaneously
Then:
main.py
#!/usr/bin/env python3
import os
import subprocess
import sys
import threading
def output_reader(proc, file):
while True:
byte = proc.stdout.read(1)
if byte:
sys.stdout.buffer.write(byte)
sys.stdout.flush()
file.buffer.write(byte)
else:
break
with subprocess.Popen(['./sleep.py', '0'], stdout=subprocess.PIPE, stderr=subprocess.PIPE) as proc1, \
subprocess.Popen(['./sleep.py', '10'], stdout=subprocess.PIPE, stderr=subprocess.PIPE) as proc2, \
open('log1.log', 'w') as file1, \
open('log2.log', 'w') as file2:
t1 = threading.Thread(target=output_reader, args=(proc1, file1))
t2 = threading.Thread(target=output_reader, args=(proc2, file2))
t1.start()
t2.start()
t1.join()
t2.join()
sleep.py
#!/usr/bin/env python3
import sys
import time
for i in range(4):
print(i + int(sys.argv[1]))
sys.stdout.flush()
time.sleep(0.5)
After running:
./main.py
stdout get updated every 0.5 seconds for every two lines to contain:
0
10
1
11
2
12
3
13
and each log file contains the respective log for a given process.
Inspired by: https://eli.thegreenplace.net/2017/interacting-with-a-long-running-child-process-in-python/
Tested on Ubuntu 18.04, Python 3.6.7.
You probably want to start investigating the os module for forking different threads (by opening an interactive session and issuing help(os)). The relevant functions are fork and any of the exec ones. To give you an idea on how to start, put something like this in a function that performs the fork (the function needs to take a list or tuple 'args' as an argument that contains the program's name and its parameters; you may also want to define stdin, out and err for the new thread):
try:
pid = os.fork()
except OSError, e:
## some debug output
sys.exit(1)
if pid == 0:
## eventually use os.putenv(..) to set environment variables
## os.execv strips of args[0] for the arguments
os.execv(args[0], args)
You can use
import os
pid = os.fork()
if pid == 0:
Continue to other code ...
This will make the python process run in background.
I haven't tried this yet but using .pyw files instead of .py files should help. pyw files dosen't have a console so in theory it should not appear and work like a background process.
I try to run simple script in windows in the same shell.
When I run
subprocess.call(["python.exe", "a.py"], shell=False)
It works fine.
But when I run
subprocess.Popen(["python.exe", "a.py"], shell=False)
It opens new shell and the shell=false has no affect.
a.py just print message to the screen.
First calling Popen with shell=False doesn't mean that the underlying python won't try to open a window/console. It's just that the current python instance executes python.exe directly and not in a system shell (cmd or sh).
Second, Popen returns a handle on the process, and you have to perform a wait() on this handle for it to end properly or you could generate a defunct process (depending on the platform you're running on). I suggest that you try
p = subprocess.Popen(["python.exe", "a.py"], shell=False)
return_code = p.wait()
to wait for process termination and get return code.
Note that Popen is a very bad way to run processes in background. The best way would be to use a separate thread
import subprocess
import threading
def run_it():
subprocess.call(["python.exe", "a.py"], shell=False)
t = threading.Thread(target=run_it)
t.start()
# do your stuff
# in the end
t.join()
I am trying to migrate a bash script to Python.
The bash script runs multiple OS commands in parallel then waits for them to finish before resuming, ie:
command1 &
command2 &
.
commandn &
wait
command
I want to achieve the same using Python subprocess. Is this possible? How can I wait for a subprocess.call command to finish before resuming?
You can still use Popen which takes the same input parameters as subprocess.call but is more flexible.
subprocess.call: The full function signature is the same as that of the Popen constructor - this functions passes all supplied arguments directly through to that interface.
One difference is that subprocess.call blocks and waits for the subprocess to complete (it is built on top of Popen), whereas Popen doesn't block and consequently allows you to launch other processes in parallel.
Try the following:
from subprocess import Popen
commands = ['command1', 'command2']
procs = [ Popen(i) for i in commands ]
for p in procs:
p.wait()
Expanding on Aaron and Martin's answer, here is a solution that runs uses subprocess and Popen to run n processes in parallel:
import subprocess
commands = ['cmd1', 'cmd2', 'cmd3', 'cmd4', 'cmd5']
n = 2 #the number of parallel processes you want
for j in range(max(int(len(commands)/n), 1)):
procs = [subprocess.Popen(i, shell=True) for i in commands[j*n: min((j+1)*n, len(commands))] ]
for p in procs:
p.wait()
I find this to be useful when using a tool like multiprocessing could cause undesired behavior.
I want to be able to start a process and then be able to kill it afterwards
Here's a little python script that starts a process, checks if it is running, waits a while, kills it, waits for it to terminate, then checks again. It uses the 'kill' command. Version 2.6 of python subprocess has a kill function. This was written on 2.5.
import subprocess
import time
proc = subprocess.Popen(["sleep", "60"], shell=False)
print 'poll =', proc.poll(), '("None" means process not terminated yet)'
time.sleep(3)
subprocess.call(["kill", "-9", "%d" % proc.pid])
proc.wait()
print 'poll =', proc.poll()
The timed output shows that it was terminated after about 3 seconds, and not 60 as the call to sleep suggests.
$ time python prockill.py
poll = None ("None" means process not terminated yet)
poll = -9
real 0m3.082s
user 0m0.055s
sys 0m0.029s
Have a look at the subprocess module.
You can also use low-level primitives like fork() via the os module.
http://docs.python.org/library/os.html#process-management
A simple function that uses subprocess module:
def CMD(cmd) :
p = subprocess.Popen(cmd, shell=True,
stdin=subprocess.PIPE,
stdout=subprocess.PIPE,
stderr=subprocess.PIPE,
close_fds=False)
return (p.stdin, p.stdout, p.stderr)
see docs for primitive fork() and modules subprocess, multiprocessing, multithreading
If you need to interact with the sub process at all, I recommend the pexpect module (link text). You can send input to the process, receive (or "expect") output in return, and you can close the process (with force=True to send SIGKILL).
I'm trying to port a shell script to the much more readable python version. The original shell script starts several processes (utilities, monitors, etc.) in the background with "&". How can I achieve the same effect in python? I'd like these processes not to die when the python scripts complete. I am sure it's related to the concept of a daemon somehow, but I couldn't find how to do this easily.
While jkp's solution works, the newer way of doing things (and the way the documentation recommends) is to use the subprocess module. For simple commands its equivalent, but it offers more options if you want to do something complicated.
Example for your case:
import subprocess
subprocess.Popen(["rm","-r","some.file"])
This will run rm -r some.file in the background. Note that calling .communicate() on the object returned from Popen will block until it completes, so don't do that if you want it to run in the background:
import subprocess
ls_output=subprocess.Popen(["sleep", "30"])
ls_output.communicate() # Will block for 30 seconds
See the documentation here.
Also, a point of clarification: "Background" as you use it here is purely a shell concept; technically, what you mean is that you want to spawn a process without blocking while you wait for it to complete. However, I've used "background" here to refer to shell-background-like behavior.
Note: This answer is less current than it was when posted in 2009. Using the subprocess module shown in other answers is now recommended in the docs
(Note that the subprocess module provides more powerful facilities for spawning new processes and retrieving their results; using that module is preferable to using these functions.)
If you want your process to start in the background you can either use system() and call it in the same way your shell script did, or you can spawn it:
import os
os.spawnl(os.P_DETACH, 'some_long_running_command')
(or, alternatively, you may try the less portable os.P_NOWAIT flag).
See the documentation here.
You probably want the answer to "How to call an external command in Python".
The simplest approach is to use the os.system function, e.g.:
import os
os.system("some_command &")
Basically, whatever you pass to the system function will be executed the same as if you'd passed it to the shell in a script.
I found this here:
On windows (win xp), the parent process will not finish until the longtask.py has finished its work. It is not what you want in CGI-script. The problem is not specific to Python, in PHP community the problems are the same.
The solution is to pass DETACHED_PROCESS Process Creation Flag to the underlying CreateProcess function in win API. If you happen to have installed pywin32 you can import the flag from the win32process module, otherwise you should define it yourself:
DETACHED_PROCESS = 0x00000008
pid = subprocess.Popen([sys.executable, "longtask.py"],
creationflags=DETACHED_PROCESS).pid
Use subprocess.Popen() with the close_fds=True parameter, which will allow the spawned subprocess to be detached from the Python process itself and continue running even after Python exits.
https://gist.github.com/yinjimmy/d6ad0742d03d54518e9f
import os, time, sys, subprocess
if len(sys.argv) == 2:
time.sleep(5)
print 'track end'
if sys.platform == 'darwin':
subprocess.Popen(['say', 'hello'])
else:
print 'main begin'
subprocess.Popen(['python', os.path.realpath(__file__), '0'], close_fds=True)
print 'main end'
Both capture output and run on background with threading
As mentioned on this answer, if you capture the output with stdout= and then try to read(), then the process blocks.
However, there are cases where you need this. For example, I wanted to launch two processes that talk over a port between them, and save their stdout to a log file and stdout.
The threading module allows us to do that.
First, have a look at how to do the output redirection part alone in this question: Python Popen: Write to stdout AND log file simultaneously
Then:
main.py
#!/usr/bin/env python3
import os
import subprocess
import sys
import threading
def output_reader(proc, file):
while True:
byte = proc.stdout.read(1)
if byte:
sys.stdout.buffer.write(byte)
sys.stdout.flush()
file.buffer.write(byte)
else:
break
with subprocess.Popen(['./sleep.py', '0'], stdout=subprocess.PIPE, stderr=subprocess.PIPE) as proc1, \
subprocess.Popen(['./sleep.py', '10'], stdout=subprocess.PIPE, stderr=subprocess.PIPE) as proc2, \
open('log1.log', 'w') as file1, \
open('log2.log', 'w') as file2:
t1 = threading.Thread(target=output_reader, args=(proc1, file1))
t2 = threading.Thread(target=output_reader, args=(proc2, file2))
t1.start()
t2.start()
t1.join()
t2.join()
sleep.py
#!/usr/bin/env python3
import sys
import time
for i in range(4):
print(i + int(sys.argv[1]))
sys.stdout.flush()
time.sleep(0.5)
After running:
./main.py
stdout get updated every 0.5 seconds for every two lines to contain:
0
10
1
11
2
12
3
13
and each log file contains the respective log for a given process.
Inspired by: https://eli.thegreenplace.net/2017/interacting-with-a-long-running-child-process-in-python/
Tested on Ubuntu 18.04, Python 3.6.7.
You probably want to start investigating the os module for forking different threads (by opening an interactive session and issuing help(os)). The relevant functions are fork and any of the exec ones. To give you an idea on how to start, put something like this in a function that performs the fork (the function needs to take a list or tuple 'args' as an argument that contains the program's name and its parameters; you may also want to define stdin, out and err for the new thread):
try:
pid = os.fork()
except OSError, e:
## some debug output
sys.exit(1)
if pid == 0:
## eventually use os.putenv(..) to set environment variables
## os.execv strips of args[0] for the arguments
os.execv(args[0], args)
You can use
import os
pid = os.fork()
if pid == 0:
Continue to other code ...
This will make the python process run in background.
I haven't tried this yet but using .pyw files instead of .py files should help. pyw files dosen't have a console so in theory it should not appear and work like a background process.