| FazBrowse GitHub Viewer | Trending | | Home |
| Tools: [Download Repo ZIP] [Original HTTPS Page] |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
This is more of a POC at this point. I think it is worth changing wait_for to use timeout in 3.12+. This seems to fix some of the open bugs of wait_for, I'll add those tests to make sure. cc @gvanrossum |
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You got a bit farther than I did when I tried this, but I'm still concerned why you had to modify several tests. (Also, there's one test that fails in CI, but doesn't appear to fail when I run it locally.)
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LG (one naming nit).
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
I had hoped to first merge one of the alternatives that can be backported to 3.10, so we can declare this fixed in 3.10. Then we would merge this one on top of that, but only in 3.11 and main. But we could also just do a custom fix for 3.10 based on one of @twisteroidambassador's PRs. (I wish you had linked this PR to the same issue rather than creating a new issue, since it's all related.) |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
In particular, @twisteroidambassador has this PR: #98607 |
Sorry, something went wrong.
a new task so no sleep is required
Fallback to using async_timeout on older python asyncio.wait_for has some underlying problems that are only fixed in cpython 3.12. See python/cpython#98518
Fallback to using async_timeout on older python asyncio.wait_for has some underlying problems that are only fixed in cpython 3.12. See python/cpython#98518
asyncio.wait_for has some underlying problems that are only fixed in cpython 3.12. Use async_timeout instead until the minimum supported version is 3.11+ and it can be replaced with asyncio.timeout See python/cpython#98518
async_timeout does not suffer from the same race problems as asyncio.wait_for see python/cpython#98518 for more details
wasted some time because asyncio.wait_for() was suppressing cancellations. [0][1][2] deja vu... [3] Looks like this is finally getting fixed in cpython 3.12 [4] So far away... In attempt to avoid encountering this again, let's try using asyncio.timeout in 3.11, which is how upstream reimplemented wait_for in 3.12 [4], and aiorpcx.timeout_after in 3.8-3.10. [0] python/cpython#86296 [1] https://bugs.python.org/issue42130 [2] https://bugs.python.org/issue45098 [3] kyuupichan/aiorpcX#44 [4] python/cpython#98518
wasted some time because asyncio.wait_for() was suppressing cancellations. [0][1][2] deja vu... [3] Looks like this is finally getting fixed in cpython 3.12 [4] So far away... In attempt to avoid encountering this again, let's try using asyncio.timeout in 3.11, which is how upstream reimplemented wait_for in 3.12 [4], and aiorpcx.timeout_after in 3.8-3.10. [0] python/cpython#86296 [1] https://bugs.python.org/issue42130 [2] https://bugs.python.org/issue45098 [3] kyuupichan/aiorpcX#44 [4] python/cpython#98518
`asyncio.wait_for` creates another tasks which leads to some race conditions in cancelation and a performance hit cpython 3.12 will change the underlying implementation of `asyncio.wait_for` to use `asyncio.wait` but that is still a long way off for many people: python/cpython#98518
* Switch usage of asyncio.wait_for to async_timeout `asyncio.wait_for` creates another tasks which leads to some race conditions in cancelation and a performance hit cpython 3.12 will change the underlying implementation of `asyncio.wait_for` to use `asyncio.wait` but that is still a long way off for many people: python/cpython#98518 * adjust ci
This is an implementation of Python's `asyncio.timeout()` which was introduced
in 3.11. We strongly encourage the use of the following approach instead of
`asyncio.wait_for()`.
async with timeout(delay):
# Your async code
In Python 3.12, `asyncio.wait_for()` is implemented in terms of
`asyncio.timeout()` which fixed a bunch of issues. However, this was never
backported (because of the lack of `async.timeout()`) and there are still many
remainig issues, specially in Python 3.10, in `async.wait_for()`.
See python/cpython#98518
This is an implementation of Python's `asyncio.timeout()` which was introduced
in 3.11. We strongly encourage the use of the following approach instead of
`asyncio.wait_for()`.
async with timeout(delay):
# Your async code
In Python 3.12, `asyncio.wait_for()` is implemented in terms of
`asyncio.timeout()` which fixed a bunch of issues. However, this was never
backported (because of the lack of `async.timeout()`) and there are still many
remainig issues, specially in Python 3.10, in `async.wait_for()`.
See python/cpython#98518
This patch implements `asyncio.timeout()` which was introduced in 3.11, as well +as `asyncio.wait_for()` on top of it. In Python 3.12, `asyncio.wait_for()` is implemented in terms of `asyncio.timeout()` which fixed a bunch of issues. However, this was never backported (because of the lack of `async.timeout()`) and there are still many remainig issues, specially in Python 3.10, in `async.wait_for()`. See python/cpython#98518
This patch implements `asyncio.timeout()` which was introduced in 3.11, as well +as `asyncio.wait_for()` on top of it. In Python 3.12, `asyncio.wait_for()` is implemented in terms of `asyncio.timeout()` which fixed a bunch of issues. However, this was never backported (because of the lack of `async.timeout()`) and there are still many remainig issues, specially in Python 3.10, in `async.wait_for()`. See python/cpython#98518
This patch implements a custom `asyncio.wait_for()` on top of an also custom `asyncio.timeout()`. `asyncio.timeout()` which was introduced in 3.11. In Python 3.12, `asyncio.wait_for()` is implemented in terms of `asyncio.timeout()` which fixed a bunch of issues. However, this was never backported (because of the lack of `async.timeout()`) and there are still many remainig issues, specially in Python 3.10, in `async.wait_for()`. See python/cpython#98518
This patch implements a custom `asyncio.wait_for()` on top of an also custom `asyncio.timeout()`. `asyncio.timeout()` which was introduced in 3.11. In Python 3.12, `asyncio.wait_for()` is implemented in terms of `asyncio.timeout()` which fixed a bunch of issues. However, this was never backported (because of the lack of `async.timeout()`) and there are still many remainig issues, specially in Python 3.10, in `async.wait_for()`. See python/cpython#98518
This patch uses `wait_for2` package to implement `asyncio.wait_for()` for Python < 3.12. In Python 3.12, `asyncio.wait_for()` is implemented in terms of `asyncio.timeout()` which fixed a bunch of issues. However, this was never backported (because of the lack of `async.timeout()`) and there are still many remainig issues, specially in Python 3.10, in `async.wait_for()`. See python/cpython#98518
This patch uses `wait_for2` package to implement `asyncio.wait_for()` for Python < 3.12. In Python 3.12, `asyncio.wait_for()` is implemented in terms of `asyncio.timeout()` which fixed a bunch of issues. However, this was never backported (because of the lack of `async.timeout()`) and there are still many remainig issues, specially in Python 3.10, in `async.wait_for()`. See python/cpython#98518
`SimpleAsyncQueue.put()` accepted a `capacity` parameter but never enforced it — items were appended unconditionally, making the queue effectively unbounded and defeating backpressure. Added `_not_full_futures` to block `put()` when the deque reaches capacity, mirroring the existing `_not_empty_futures` pattern in `get()`. Updated docstring to document why this class exists (Python < 3.12 `asyncio.wait_for` item-swallowing bug, python/cpython#98518). Updated `test_queue.py` with assertions that `put()` blocks at capacity and resumes after `get()`.
* Fix `SimpleAsyncQueue` missing capacity enforcement `SimpleAsyncQueue.put()` accepted a `capacity` parameter but never enforced it — items were appended unconditionally, making the queue effectively unbounded and defeating backpressure. Added `_not_full_futures` to block `put()` when the deque reaches capacity, mirroring the existing `_not_empty_futures` pattern in `get()`. Updated docstring to document why this class exists (Python < 3.12 `asyncio.wait_for` item-swallowing bug, python/cpython#98518). Updated `test_queue.py` with assertions that `put()` blocks at capacity and resumes after `get()`. * Use self._loop consistently, assert on capacity invariant * Rename variables for consistency with `asyncio.Queue` * Fix putter starvation in SimpleAsyncQueue A new `put()` could steal a slot freed by `get()` before a waiting putter had a chance to resume, starving earlier waiters indefinitely. Replaced `len(deque)`-based capacity check with a `_size` counter that tracks claimed capacity (items in deque + slots reserved for woken putters). `get()` only decrements `_size` when there are no waiting putters; otherwise it transfers the slot directly to the next waiter. This guarantees FIFO ordering and prevents starvation. * Assert size. Add clarifying comment. --------- Co-authored-by: Gal Topper <galt@iguazio.com>
This patch uses `wait_for2` package to implement `asyncio.wait_for()` for Python < 3.12. In Python 3.12, `asyncio.wait_for()` is implemented in terms of `asyncio.timeout()` which fixed a bunch of issues. However, this was never backported (because of the lack of `async.timeout()`) and there are still many remainig issues, specially in Python 3.10, in `async.wait_for()`. See python/cpython#98518
| Back | FazBrowse Home | New Git URL |
This PR changes asyncio.wait_for to use asyncio.timeout as its underlying implementation. It simplifies the code and makes it easy to understand the cancellation semantics as both asyncio.timeout and asyncio.wait_for behaves similarly.
Fixes #86296
Fixes #81839
Fixes #96764