问题:Python进程池非守护进程?

是否可以创建非守护进程的python池?我希望一个池能够调用内部有另一个池的函数。

我想要这个,因为守护进程无法创建进程。具体来说,它将导致错误:

AssertionError: daemonic processes are not allowed to have children

例如,考虑这样一种情况:其中function_a有一个运行的池,function_b而有一个运行的池function_c。该功能链将失败,因为function_b它正在守护进程中运行,并且守护进程无法创建进程。

Would it be possible to create a python Pool that is non-daemonic? I want a pool to be able to call a function that has another pool inside.

I want this because deamon processes cannot create process. Specifically, it will cause the error:

AssertionError: daemonic processes are not allowed to have children

For example, consider the scenario where function_a has a pool which runs function_b which has a pool which runs function_c. This function chain will fail, because function_b is being run in a daemon process, and daemon processes cannot create processes.


回答 0

multiprocessing.pool.Pool类创建在其工作进程__init__的方法,使他们邪,开始他们,这是不可能自己重新设置daemon属性False在开始之前(事后这是不允许的了)。但是,您可以创建自己的multiprocesing.pool.Poolmultiprocessing.Pool只是包装函数)multiprocessing.Process子类,并替换您自己的子类(该子类始终是非守护程序的)用于工作进程。

这是如何执行此操作的完整示例。重要的部分是两个类NoDaemonProcessMyPool在顶部pool.close()pool.join()在您的MyPool实例的最后,是要调用的类。

#!/usr/bin/env python
# -*- coding: UTF-8 -*-

import multiprocessing
# We must import this explicitly, it is not imported by the top-level
# multiprocessing module.
import multiprocessing.pool
import time

from random import randint


class NoDaemonProcess(multiprocessing.Process):
    # make 'daemon' attribute always return False
    def _get_daemon(self):
        return False
    def _set_daemon(self, value):
        pass
    daemon = property(_get_daemon, _set_daemon)

# We sub-class multiprocessing.pool.Pool instead of multiprocessing.Pool
# because the latter is only a wrapper function, not a proper class.
class MyPool(multiprocessing.pool.Pool):
    Process = NoDaemonProcess

def sleepawhile(t):
    print("Sleeping %i seconds..." % t)
    time.sleep(t)
    return t

def work(num_procs):
    print("Creating %i (daemon) workers and jobs in child." % num_procs)
    pool = multiprocessing.Pool(num_procs)

    result = pool.map(sleepawhile,
        [randint(1, 5) for x in range(num_procs)])

    # The following is not really needed, since the (daemon) workers of the
    # child's pool are killed when the child is terminated, but it's good
    # practice to cleanup after ourselves anyway.
    pool.close()
    pool.join()
    return result

def test():
    print("Creating 5 (non-daemon) workers and jobs in main process.")
    pool = MyPool(5)

    result = pool.map(work, [randint(1, 5) for x in range(5)])

    pool.close()
    pool.join()
    print(result)

if __name__ == '__main__':
    test()

The multiprocessing.pool.Pool class creates the worker processes in its __init__ method, makes them daemonic and starts them, and it is not possible to re-set their daemon attribute to False before they are started (and afterwards it’s not allowed anymore). But you can create your own sub-class of multiprocesing.pool.Pool (multiprocessing.Pool is just a wrapper function) and substitute your own multiprocessing.Process sub-class, which is always non-daemonic, to be used for the worker processes.

Here’s a full example of how to do this. The important parts are the two classes NoDaemonProcess and MyPool at the top and to call pool.close() and pool.join() on your MyPool instance at the end.

#!/usr/bin/env python
# -*- coding: UTF-8 -*-

import multiprocessing
# We must import this explicitly, it is not imported by the top-level
# multiprocessing module.
import multiprocessing.pool
import time

from random import randint


class NoDaemonProcess(multiprocessing.Process):
    # make 'daemon' attribute always return False
    def _get_daemon(self):
        return False
    def _set_daemon(self, value):
        pass
    daemon = property(_get_daemon, _set_daemon)

# We sub-class multiprocessing.pool.Pool instead of multiprocessing.Pool
# because the latter is only a wrapper function, not a proper class.
class MyPool(multiprocessing.pool.Pool):
    Process = NoDaemonProcess

def sleepawhile(t):
    print("Sleeping %i seconds..." % t)
    time.sleep(t)
    return t

def work(num_procs):
    print("Creating %i (daemon) workers and jobs in child." % num_procs)
    pool = multiprocessing.Pool(num_procs)

    result = pool.map(sleepawhile,
        [randint(1, 5) for x in range(num_procs)])

    # The following is not really needed, since the (daemon) workers of the
    # child's pool are killed when the child is terminated, but it's good
    # practice to cleanup after ourselves anyway.
    pool.close()
    pool.join()
    return result

def test():
    print("Creating 5 (non-daemon) workers and jobs in main process.")
    pool = MyPool(5)

    result = pool.map(work, [randint(1, 5) for x in range(5)])

    pool.close()
    pool.join()
    print(result)

if __name__ == '__main__':
    test()

回答 1

我必须在Python 3.7中使用非守护程序池,并最终改编了接受的答案中发布的代码。下面是创建非守护程序池的代码段:

class NoDaemonProcess(multiprocessing.Process):
    @property
    def daemon(self):
        return False

    @daemon.setter
    def daemon(self, value):
        pass


class NoDaemonContext(type(multiprocessing.get_context())):
    Process = NoDaemonProcess

# We sub-class multiprocessing.pool.Pool instead of multiprocessing.Pool
# because the latter is only a wrapper function, not a proper class.
class MyPool(multiprocessing.pool.Pool):
    def __init__(self, *args, **kwargs):
        kwargs['context'] = NoDaemonContext()
        super(MyPool, self).__init__(*args, **kwargs)

由于的当前实现multiprocessing已被广泛地重构为基于上下文,因此我们需要提供一个NoDaemonContext具有NoDaemonProcessas属性的类。MyPool然后将使用该上下文,而不是默认上下文。

就是说,我应该警告这种方法至少有两个警告:

  1. 它仍然取决于multiprocessing软件包的实现细节,因此可能随时中断。
  2. 为什么有正当的理由multiprocessing说得那么难用非恶魔的过程,其中有许多是解释在这里。我认为最引人注目的是:

    至于允许子线程使用子进程来产生自己的子进程,如果父线程或子线程在子进程完成并返回之前终止,则可能会产生一些僵尸“孙子”。

I had the necessity to employ a non-daemonic pool in Python 3.7 and ended up adapting the code posted in the accepted answer. Below there’s the snippet that creates the non-daemonic pool:

import multiprocessing.pool

class NoDaemonProcess(multiprocessing.Process):
    @property
    def daemon(self):
        return False

    @daemon.setter
    def daemon(self, value):
        pass


class NoDaemonContext(type(multiprocessing.get_context())):
    Process = NoDaemonProcess

# We sub-class multiprocessing.pool.Pool instead of multiprocessing.Pool
# because the latter is only a wrapper function, not a proper class.
class NestablePool(multiprocessing.pool.Pool):
    def __init__(self, *args, **kwargs):
        kwargs['context'] = NoDaemonContext()
        super(NestablePool, self).__init__(*args, **kwargs)

As the current implementation of multiprocessing has been extensively refactored to be based on contexts, we need to provide a NoDaemonContext class that has our NoDaemonProcess as attribute. NestablePool will then use that context instead of the default one.

That said, I should warn that there are at least two caveats to this approach:

  1. It still depends on implementation details of the multiprocessing package, and could therefore break at any time.
  2. There are valid reasons why multiprocessing made it so hard to use non-daemonic processes, many of which are explained here. The most compelling in my opinion is:

As for allowing children threads to spawn off children of its own using subprocess runs the risk of creating a little army of zombie ‘grandchildren’ if either the parent or child threads terminate before the subprocess completes and returns.


回答 2

多处理模块有一个漂亮的界面使用与进程池线程。根据您当前的用例,您可能会考虑将其multiprocessing.pool.ThreadPool用于外部Pool,这将导致线程(允许从内部生成进程)而不是进程。

它可能受到GIL的限制,但是在我的特殊情况下(我都对两者进行了测试)此处Pool创建的外部进程的启动时间远远超过了解决方案的启动时间。ThreadPool


这真的很容易掉ProcessesThreads在此处此处阅读有关如何使用ThreadPool解决方案的更多信息。

The multiprocessing module has a nice interface to use pools with processes or threads. Depending on your current use case, you might consider using multiprocessing.pool.ThreadPool for your outer Pool, which will result in threads (that allow to spawn processes from within) as opposed to processes.

It might be limited by the GIL, but in my particular case (I tested both), the startup time for the processes from the outer Pool as created here far outweighed the solution with ThreadPool.


It’s really easy to swap Processes for Threads. Read more about how to use a ThreadPool solution here or here.


回答 3

在某些Python版本上,将标准Pool替换为custom会引发错误:AssertionError: group argument must be None for now

在这里,我找到了可以提供帮助的解决方案:

class NoDaemonProcess(multiprocessing.Process):
    # make 'daemon' attribute always return False
    @property
    def daemon(self):
        return False

    @daemon.setter
    def daemon(self, val):
        pass


class NoDaemonProcessPool(multiprocessing.pool.Pool):

    def Process(self, *args, **kwds):
        proc = super(NoDaemonProcessPool, self).Process(*args, **kwds)
        proc.__class__ = NoDaemonProcess

        return proc

On some Python versions replacing standard Pool to custom can raise error: AssertionError: group argument must be None for now.

Here I found a solution that can help:

class NoDaemonProcess(multiprocessing.Process):
    # make 'daemon' attribute always return False
    @property
    def daemon(self):
        return False

    @daemon.setter
    def daemon(self, val):
        pass


class NoDaemonProcessPool(multiprocessing.pool.Pool):

    def Process(self, *args, **kwds):
        proc = super(NoDaemonProcessPool, self).Process(*args, **kwds)
        proc.__class__ = NoDaemonProcess

        return proc

回答 4

concurrent.futures.ProcessPoolExecutor没有这个限制。它可以有一个嵌套的过程池,完全没有问题:

from concurrent.futures import ProcessPoolExecutor as Pool
from itertools import repeat
from multiprocessing import current_process
import time

def pid():
    return current_process().pid

def _square(i):  # Runs in inner_pool
    square = i ** 2
    time.sleep(i / 10)
    print(f'{pid()=} {i=} {square=}')
    return square

def _sum_squares(i, j):  # Runs in outer_pool
    with Pool(max_workers=2) as inner_pool:
        squares = inner_pool.map(_square, (i, j))
    sum_squares = sum(squares)
    time.sleep(sum_squares ** .5)
    print(f'{pid()=}, {i=}, {j=} {sum_squares=}')
    return sum_squares

def main():
    with Pool(max_workers=3) as outer_pool:
        for sum_squares in outer_pool.map(_sum_squares, range(5), repeat(3)):
            print(f'{pid()=} {sum_squares=}')

if __name__ == "__main__":
    main()

上面的演示代码已通过Python 3.8进行了测试。

信用:jfs回答

concurrent.futures.ProcessPoolExecutor doesn’t have this limitation. It can have a nested process pool with no problem at all:

from concurrent.futures import ProcessPoolExecutor as Pool
from itertools import repeat
from multiprocessing import current_process
import time

def pid():
    return current_process().pid

def _square(i):  # Runs in inner_pool
    square = i ** 2
    time.sleep(i / 10)
    print(f'{pid()=} {i=} {square=}')
    return square

def _sum_squares(i, j):  # Runs in outer_pool
    with Pool(max_workers=2) as inner_pool:
        squares = inner_pool.map(_square, (i, j))
    sum_squares = sum(squares)
    time.sleep(sum_squares ** .5)
    print(f'{pid()=}, {i=}, {j=} {sum_squares=}')
    return sum_squares

def main():
    with Pool(max_workers=3) as outer_pool:
        for sum_squares in outer_pool.map(_sum_squares, range(5), repeat(3)):
            print(f'{pid()=} {sum_squares=}')

if __name__ == "__main__":
    main()

The above demonstration code was tested with Python 3.8.

A limitation of ProcessPoolExecutor, however, is that it doesn’t have maxtasksperchild. If you need this, consider the answer by Massimiliano instead.

Credit: answer by jfs


回答 5

我遇到的问题是试图在模块之​​间导入全局变量,从而导致多次评估ProcessPool()行。

globals.py

from processing             import Manager, Lock
from pathos.multiprocessing import ProcessPool
from pathos.threading       import ThreadPool

class SingletonMeta(type):
    def __new__(cls, name, bases, dict):
        dict['__deepcopy__'] = dict['__copy__'] = lambda self, *args: self
        return super(SingletonMeta, cls).__new__(cls, name, bases, dict)

    def __init__(cls, name, bases, dict):
        super(SingletonMeta, cls).__init__(name, bases, dict)
        cls.instance = None

    def __call__(cls,*args,**kw):
        if cls.instance is None:
            cls.instance = super(SingletonMeta, cls).__call__(*args, **kw)
        return cls.instance

    def __deepcopy__(self, item):
        return item.__class__.instance

class Globals(object):
    __metaclass__ = SingletonMeta
    """     
    This class is a workaround to the bug: AssertionError: daemonic processes are not allowed to have children

    The root cause is that importing this file from different modules causes this file to be reevalutated each time, 
    thus ProcessPool() gets reexecuted inside that child thread, thus causing the daemonic processes bug    
    """
    def __init__(self):
        print "%s::__init__()" % (self.__class__.__name__)
        self.shared_manager      = Manager()
        self.shared_process_pool = ProcessPool()
        self.shared_thread_pool  = ThreadPool()
        self.shared_lock         = Lock()        # BUG: Windows: global name 'lock' is not defined | doesn't affect cygwin

然后从代码中的其他位置安全地导入

from globals import Globals
Globals().shared_manager      
Globals().shared_process_pool
Globals().shared_thread_pool  
Globals().shared_lock         

The issue I encountered was in trying to import globals between modules, causing the ProcessPool() line to get evaluated multiple times.

globals.py

from processing             import Manager, Lock
from pathos.multiprocessing import ProcessPool
from pathos.threading       import ThreadPool

class SingletonMeta(type):
    def __new__(cls, name, bases, dict):
        dict['__deepcopy__'] = dict['__copy__'] = lambda self, *args: self
        return super(SingletonMeta, cls).__new__(cls, name, bases, dict)

    def __init__(cls, name, bases, dict):
        super(SingletonMeta, cls).__init__(name, bases, dict)
        cls.instance = None

    def __call__(cls,*args,**kw):
        if cls.instance is None:
            cls.instance = super(SingletonMeta, cls).__call__(*args, **kw)
        return cls.instance

    def __deepcopy__(self, item):
        return item.__class__.instance

class Globals(object):
    __metaclass__ = SingletonMeta
    """     
    This class is a workaround to the bug: AssertionError: daemonic processes are not allowed to have children
     
    The root cause is that importing this file from different modules causes this file to be reevalutated each time, 
    thus ProcessPool() gets reexecuted inside that child thread, thus causing the daemonic processes bug    
    """
    def __init__(self):
        print "%s::__init__()" % (self.__class__.__name__)
        self.shared_manager      = Manager()
        self.shared_process_pool = ProcessPool()
        self.shared_thread_pool  = ThreadPool()
        self.shared_lock         = Lock()        # BUG: Windows: global name 'lock' is not defined | doesn't affect cygwin

Then import safely from elsewhere in your code

from globals import Globals
Globals().shared_manager      
Globals().shared_process_pool
Globals().shared_thread_pool  
Globals().shared_lock         

I have written a more expanded wrapper class around pathos.multiprocessing here:

As a side note, if your usecase just requires async multiprocess map as a performance optimization, then joblib will manage all your process pools behind the scenes and allow this very simple syntax:

squares = Parallel(-1)( delayed(lambda num: num**2)(x) for x in range(100) )

回答 6

我见过人们通过使用称为桌球celery的叉(多处理池扩展)来处理此问题,该叉允许守护进程生成子进程。解决方法是仅通过以下方式替换模块:multiprocessingmultiprocessing

import billiard as multiprocessing

I have seen people dealing with this issue by using celery‘s fork of multiprocessing called billiard (multiprocessing pool extensions), which allows daemonic processes to spawn children. The walkaround is to simply replace the multiprocessing module by:

import billiard as multiprocessing

声明:本站所有文章,如无特殊说明或标注,均为本站原创发布。任何个人或组织,在未征得本站同意时,禁止复制、盗用、采集、发布本站内容到任何网站、书籍等各类媒体平台。如若本站内容侵犯了原著者的合法权益,可联系我们进行处理。