New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Global String Objects are Interned Only in the First Interpreter #106931
Comments
I prefer option 1 and would like to try make it work after I am in better health. |
I likewise prefer the first option, though with some other data structure than a dict. |
Solutions I've considered:
|
We tried this before with a dict and for all interned strings. That ran into problems due to interpreter isolation. However, exclusively using a per-interpreter cache caused some inconsistency that can eliminate the benefit of interning. Here we circle back to using a global cache, but only for statically allocated strings. We also use a more-basic _Py_hashtable_t for that global cache instead of a dict. Ideally we would only have the global cache, but the optional isolation of each interpreter's allocator means that a non-static string object must not outlive its interpreter. Thus we would have to store a copy of each such interned string in the global cache, tied to the main interpreter.
…gh-107272) We tried this before with a dict and for all interned strings. That ran into problems due to interpreter isolation. However, exclusively using a per-interpreter cache caused some inconsistency that can eliminate the benefit of interning. Here we circle back to using a global cache, but only for statically allocated strings. We also use a more-basic _Py_hashtable_t for that global cache instead of a dict. Ideally we would only have the global cache, but the optional isolation of each interpreter's allocator means that a non-static string object must not outlive its interpreter. Thus we would have to store a copy of each such interned string in the global cache, tied to the main interpreter. (cherry picked from commit b72947a) Co-authored-by: Eric Snow <ericsnowcurrently@gmail.com>
Skip subinterpreter tests when not supported.
This is done. FYI, I didn't backport the fix to 3.12, given how late in the release cycle we are and the reservations of the release manager. |
I reopen the issue. Using tracemalloc, test_sys now fails with a fatal error since commit b72947a:
gdb traceback:
|
…ythongh-107272) We tried this before with a dict and for all interned strings. That ran into problems due to interpreter isolation. However, exclusively using a per-interpreter cache caused some inconsistency that can eliminate the benefit of interning. Here we circle back to using a global cache, but only for statically allocated strings. We also use a more-basic _Py_hashtable_t for that global cache instead of a dict. Ideally we would only have the global cache, but the optional isolation of each interpreter's allocator means that a non-static string object must not outlive its interpreter. Thus we would have to store a copy of each such interned string in the global cache, tied to the main interpreter. (cherry-picked from commit b72947a)
…ythongh-107272) We tried this before with a dict and for all interned strings. That ran into problems due to interpreter isolation. However, exclusively using a per-interpreter cache caused some inconsistency that can eliminate the benefit of interning. Here we circle back to using a global cache, but only for statically allocated strings. We also use a more-basic _Py_hashtable_t for that global cache instead of a dict. Ideally we would only have the global cache, but the optional isolation of each interpreter's allocator means that a non-static string object must not outlive its interpreter. Thus we would have to store a copy of each such interned string in the global cache, tied to the main interpreter. (cherry-picked from commit b72947a)
…7272) (gh-110713) We tried this before with a dict and for all interned strings. That ran into problems due to interpreter isolation. However, exclusively using a per-interpreter cache caused some inconsistency that can eliminate the benefit of interning. Here we circle back to using a global cache, but only for statically allocated strings. We also use a more-basic _Py_hashtable_t for that global cache instead of a dict. Ideally we would only have the global cache, but the optional isolation of each interpreter's allocator means that a non-static string object must not outlive its interpreter. Thus we would have to store a copy of each such interned string in the global cache, tied to the main interpreter. (cherry-picked from commit b72947a)
We tried this before with a dict and for all interned strings. That ran into problems due to interpreter isolation. However, exclusively using a per-interpreter cache caused some inconsistency that can eliminate the benefit of interning. Here we circle back to using a global cache, but only for statically allocated strings. We also use a more-basic _Py_hashtable_t for that global cache instead of a dict. Ideally we would only have the global cache, but the optional isolation of each interpreter's allocator means that a non-static string object must not outlive its interpreter. Thus we would have to store a copy of each such interned string in the global cache, tied to the main interpreter. (cherry-picked from commit b72947a)
We tried this before with a dict and for all interned strings. That ran into problems due to interpreter isolation. However, exclusively using a per-interpreter cache caused some inconsistency that can eliminate the benefit of interning. Here we circle back to using a global cache, but only for statically allocated strings. We also use a more-basic _Py_hashtable_t for that global cache instead of a dict. Ideally we would only have the global cache, but the optional isolation of each interpreter's allocator means that a non-static string object must not outlive its interpreter. Thus we would have to store a copy of each such interned string in the global cache, tied to the main interpreter. (cherry-picked from commit b72947a) (cherry-picked from commit 3e6b328)
We tried this before with a dict and for all interned strings. That ran into problems due to interpreter isolation. However, exclusively using a per-interpreter cache caused some inconsistency that can eliminate the benefit of interning. Here we circle back to using a global cache, but only for statically allocated strings. We also use a more-basic _Py_hashtable_t for that global cache instead of a dict. Ideally we would only have the global cache, but the optional isolation of each interpreter's allocator means that a non-static string object must not outlive its interpreter. Thus we would have to store a copy of each such interned string in the global cache, tied to the main interpreter. (cherry-picked from commit b72947a) (cherry-picked from commit 3e6b328)
When a string object is interned via
_PyUnicode_InternInPlace()
, its "state.interned" field is set. Afterward, subsequent calls to_PyUnicode_InternInPlace()
will skip that string. The problem is that some strings may be used in multiple interpreters, which each have their own interned dict. The string is shared between the interpreters, along with its "state.interned" field. That means the string will only be interned in the first interpreter where_PyUnicode_InternInPlace()
is called (ignoring races in the function, e.g. gh-106930).We need to fix it so one of the following is true:
Linked PRs
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: