Ask Solem <a...@opera.com> added the comment: > A potential implementation is in termination.patch. Basically, > try to shut down gracefully, but if you timeout, just give up and > kill everything.
You can't have a sensible default timeout, because the worker may be processing something important... > It's a lot less code (one could write an even shorter patch > that doesn't try to do any additional graceful error handling), > doesn't add a new monitor thread, doesn't add any more IPC > mechanism, etc.. FWIW, I don't see any of these changes as bad, > but I don't feel like I have a sense of how generally useful they > would be. Not everything can be simple. Getting this right may require a bit of code. I think we can get rid of the ack_handler thread by making the result handler responsible for both acks and results, but I haven't tried it yet, and this code is already running in production by many so didn't want to change it unless I had to. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue9205> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
