allow multiple threads to efficiently send the same requests to a processing.Pool without incurring duplicate processing

[DavidDecotigny]

BPO	3735
Nosy	@iritkatriel

^{Note: these values reflect the state of the issue at the time it was migrated and might not reflect the current state.}

Show more details

GitHub fields:

assignee = None
closed_at = <Date 2020-12-19.00:09:08.855>
created_at = <Date 2008-08-29.23:07:08.175>
labels = ['type-feature', 'library']
title = 'allow multiple threads to efficiently send the same requests to a processing.Pool without incurring duplicate processing'
updated_at = <Date 2020-12-19.00:09:08.855>
user = 'https://bugs.python.org/DavidDecotigny'

bugs.python.org fields:

activity = <Date 2020-12-19.00:09:08.855>
actor = 'iritkatriel'
assignee = 'jnoller'
closed = True
closed_date = <Date 2020-12-19.00:09:08.855>
closer = 'iritkatriel'
components = ['Library (Lib)']
creation = <Date 2008-08-29.23:07:08.175>
creator = 'DavidDecotigny'
dependencies = []
files = []
hgrepos = []
issue_num = 3735
keywords = []
message_count = 6.0
messages = ['72170', '72235', '72271', '83259', '115081', '381152']
nosy_count = 4.0
nosy_names = ['jnoller', 'DavidDecotigny', 'asksol', 'iritkatriel']
pr_nums = []
priority = 'low'
resolution = 'postponed'
stage = 'resolved'
status = 'closed'
superseder = None
type = 'enhancement'
url = 'https://bugs.python.org/issue3735'
versions = ['Python 3.2']

[DavidDecotigny]

I posted a recipe on ASPN: http://code.activestate.com/recipes/576462/
and Jesse, cheerleader for the inclusion of (multi)processing into
python-core, suggested that it could be interesting to add this feature
to the next pythons.
This recipe is based on version 0.52 of the standalone "processing"
package, and allows to avoid redundancy when multiple threads send the
same job requests to a pool of background worker processes. The recipe
details the why and the how.
Some notes on the implementation, though:

• There is a "Begin/End workaround" section in the code, which aims at
  working around a limitation of processing 0.52 (see comments and
  docstring for details). I sent issue bpo-014431 to the issue tracker for
  processing on berlios, this would allow to get rid of this workaround
• Read my comment Rename README to README.rst and enhance formatting #2 to the recipe, dealing with my thoughts of using
  weak references

[jnoller]

Thanks for adjusting the targets ben

On Aug 31, 2008, at 9:56 PM, Benjamin Peterson
<report@bugs.python.org> wrote:

Changes by Benjamin Peterson <musiccomposition@gmail.com>:

----------
versions: +Python 2.7, Python 3.1 -Python 2.6, Python 3.0

---

Python tracker <report@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue3735\>

---

[jnoller]

Another place this could go is in the examples FWIW

[jnoller]

Daniel, if issues are in my queue, I can manage the state

[asksol]

This is a nice feature, but it's also very specific and can be implemented
by extending what's already there.

Could you make a patch for this that applies to the py3k branch? If no one has the time for this, then we should probably just close the issue, until someone requests it again.

[iritkatriel]

If nobody will object in the next couple of weeks I will close this, as suggested in the previous comment.