On Sep 17, 1:38 am, Ned Deily <n...@acm.org> wrote: > In article <20100917052259.ga28...@cskk.homeip.net>, > Cameron Simpson <c...@zip.com.au> wrote: > > > > > > > On 16Sep2010 22:14, Ned Deily <n...@acm.org> wrote: > > | In article <20100917043826.ga21...@cskk.homeip.net>, > > | Cameron Simpson <c...@zip.com.au> wrote: > > | > > | > On 16Sep2010 09:55, mark.pellet...@asrcms.com > > <mark.pellet...@asrcms.com> > > | > wrote: > > | > | For some reason, the tasks I put into my thread pool occasionally get > > | > | run more than once. > > | > | > > | > | Here's the code: > > | > > > | > You need to post your _exact_ code. I had to change: > > | > from queue import Queue > > | > into > > | > from Queue import Queue > > | > So: _do_ you have a "queue" (lowercase) module? Is it buggy? > > | > > | The OP is probably using Python 3. > > > Ah, that explains the print(). Anyone know if print() is thread safe in > > python 3? > > I vaguely recalled a similar problem and, on the second try, found it: > > http://bugs.python.org/issue6750 > > Looks like that fix should have been in Python 3.1.2. > > -- > Ned Deily, > n...@acm.org- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
I was a little surprised at my problems, as I cribbed the code from http://docs.python.org/py3k/library/queue.html?highlight=queue#queue.Queue.put But in the end, yeah it does look like a thread-safe problem with print. I tried replacing the print statement by using another queue, and it worked just fine. Glad to know that it's fixed in 3.1.2; of course, I am running 3.1.1. Doesn't matter, the print statement was just for demonstration purposes. I'm actually going to put a subprocess.getoutput() there. Wonder if that's thread safe? Thanks, Cameron and Ned -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
