Paul Probert wrote:
> Thanks everyone for your help.
> It was the "Abouttime.exe" program, a time synch utility. To get the
> problem, you have to run it as a service, and possibly it has to have
> trouble connecting to its time servers. It would cause time.sleep(1) to
> sometimes block for 20
Mladen Adamovic wrote:
> Magnus Lycka wrote:
>
>> On Windows that it. At least on Linux and Solaris, time.clock() returns
>> CPU time. If time.clock() returns significantly different values before
>> and after time.sleep(1), there's something seriously broken in sleep on
>> such platforms.
>
> No
Magnus Lycka wrote:
> On Windows that it. At least on Linux and Solaris, time.clock() returns
> CPU time. If time.clock() returns significantly different values before
> and after time.sleep(1), there's something seriously broken in sleep on
> such platforms.
No!
When process run the sleep, the op
Claudio Grondi wrote:
> I mean, that using time.clock() solves the problem, because the output
> of the following code:
On Windows that it. At least on Linux and Solaris, time.clock() returns
CPU time. If time.clock() returns significantly different values before
and after time.sleep(1), there's
Peter Hansen wrote:
> Magnus Lycka wrote:
>
>> With an operating system such as Windows, this is
>> probably something you can expect to happen, although
>> I'm surprised if such long lag times as 200 s are typical.
>
> No way. I mean, I'm the biggest critic of Windows operating systems
> when
Tony Nelson wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Claudio Grondi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>>Claudio Grondi wrote:
>>
>>>Claudio Grondi wrote:
>>>
>>>
Paul Probert wrote:
>Peter Hansen wrote:
>
>
>>Are you saying that you believe the time.sleep(1) call is
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Claudio Grondi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Claudio Grondi wrote:
> > Claudio Grondi wrote:
> >
> >> Paul Probert wrote:
> >>
> >>> Peter Hansen wrote:
> >>>
> Are you saying that you believe the time.sleep(1) call is actually
> blocking for 200 seconds
Claudio Grondi wrote:
> Claudio Grondi wrote:
>
>> Paul Probert wrote:
>>
>>> Peter Hansen wrote:
>>>
Are you saying that you believe the time.sleep(1) call is actually
blocking for 200 seconds?
>>
>> With such rare occurrence it is very hard to tell what is going on.
>> Usually I put
Thanks everyone for your help.
It was the "Abouttime.exe" program, a time synch utility. To get the
problem, you have to run it as a service, and possibly it has to have
trouble connecting to its time servers. It would cause time.sleep(1) to
sometimes block for 200 seconds. Not "about" 200 se
Paul Probert wrote:
[...]
> Its happening roughly 4 times a day total on our 20 machines, ie about
> once every 5 days on a given machine.
Do they all have similar anti-virus programs? Some of those can
freeze out other tasks from time to time. Just one more candidate.
--
--Bryan
--
http://ma
Dennis Lee Bieber schreef:
> On Fri, 24 Feb 2006 08:44:49 -0600, Paul Probert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> declaimed the following in comp.lang.python:
>
>> This is now our leading suspect. All the affected machines have
>> "abouttime.exe" running as a service, something our sysadmin put in a
>> few ye
Paul Probert wrote:
> Yes, I'm doing this:
> .
> oldtime=time.time()
> time.sleep(1)
> newtime=time.time()
> dt=newtime-oldtime
> if dt > 2:
> print 'dt=',dt,' time=',time.strftime('%Y_%m_%d_%Hh_%Mm_%Ss')
> Its happening roug
Dennis Lee Bieber wrote:
>On Thu, 23 Feb 2006 15:56:09 -0600, Paul Probert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>declaimed the following in comp.lang.python:
>
>
>
>
>> Thanks for the reply. I should have mentioned, this happens to just
>>about every machine in our collection of about 20 machines. Each is of a
Claudio Grondi wrote:
> Paul Probert wrote:
>
>> Peter Hansen wrote:
>>
>>> Are you saying that you believe the time.sleep(1) call is actually
>>> blocking for 200 seconds?
> With such rare occurrence it is very hard to tell what is going on.
> Usually I put such strange things on a list of curi
Grant Edwards wrote:
>Time to dowload a linux CD then, eh?
>
>
>
We are looking at that very seriously. The big hurdle is that we run a
lot of laboratory hardware that has no support under linux. A world
where there is no more Kazaa or sasser seems like it would be wonderful,
though.
Paul Pr
Magnus Lycka wrote:
> With an operating system such as Windows, this is
> probably something you can expect to happen, although
> I'm surprised if such long lag times as 200 s are typical.
No way. I mean, I'm the biggest critic of Windows operating systems
when used in realtime environments (at
Paul Probert wrote:
> Yes, I'm doing this:
> .
> oldtime=time.time()
> time.sleep(1)
> newtime=time.time()
> dt=newtime-oldtime
> if dt > 2:
> print 'dt=',dt,' time=',time.strftime('%Y_%m_%d_%Hh_%Mm_%Ss')
> Its happening roug
Dennis Lee Bieber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Any chance they all tend to have slow clocks, and are getting bitten
> by a semi-random NTP time update; my machine tends to run the NTP update
> at 7-day intervals (including time of day), counting from the last
> successful synchronization.
T
On 2006-02-23, Paul Probert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>In similar situation I would start to blame the hardware for the
>>problem, so below a kind of checklist to go through:
>
> Thanks for the reply. I should have mentioned, this happens to just
> about every machine in our collection of ab
Paul Probert wrote:
[snip my slightly-snotty quoting of the sleep.time docs]
>Thanks, but yes, I had read that before posting. One would think,
> though, that the extra 200 seconds is a bit extreme to be blamable on
> system scheduling granularity.
I didn't intend to invoke scheduling gran
Paul Probert wrote:
> Peter Hansen wrote:
>
>> Are you saying that you believe the time.sleep(1) call is actually
>> blocking for 200 seconds? Or just that your loop (and we can only
>> guess what it looks like) is the one taking that long?
>>
>> If the former, try something like putting "print
Em Qui, 2006-02-23 às 15:26 -0600, Paul Probert escreveu:
>My app runs in a loop looking for changes in a database, and like a
> good boy I call time.sleep(1) inside the loop. Unfortunately this
> sometimes runs for 200 seconds or so, presumably while my OS is calling
> Bill Gates to tell hi
Paul Probert wrote:
> Peter Hansen wrote:
>>Are you saying that you believe the time.sleep(1) call is actually
>>blocking for 200 seconds? Or just that your loop (and we can only guess
>>what it looks like) is the one taking that long?
>
> Yes, I'm doing this:
>.
> old
Peter Hansen wrote:
>Are you saying that you believe the time.sleep(1) call is actually
>blocking for 200 seconds? Or just that your loop (and we can only guess
>what it looks like) is the one taking that long?
>
>If the former, try something like putting "print 'before'" and "print
>'after'"
Benji York wrote:
>Paul Probert wrote:
> > Hi, My app runs in a loop looking for changes in a database, and like
> > a good boy I call time.sleep(1) inside the loop. Unfortunately this
> > sometimes runs for 200 seconds or so, presumably while my OS is
> > calling Bill Gates to tell him what I've
Claudio Grondi wrote:
>In similar situation I would start to blame the hardware for the
>problem, so below a kind of checklist to go through:
>
> 1. have you changed any hardware?
> 2. have you installed new drivers?
> 3. have you connected via USB/Firewire/IDE or other interfaces/ports
>e
On 2/23/06, Claudio Grondi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Paul Probert wrote:> Hi,> My app runs in a loop looking for changes in a database, and like a> good boy I call time.sleep(1) inside the loop. Unfortunately this> sometimes runs for 200 seconds or so, presumably while my OS is calling
> Bill Ga
Paul Probert wrote:
>My app runs in a loop looking for changes in a database, and like a
> good boy I call time.sleep(1) inside the loop. Unfortunately this
> sometimes runs for 200 seconds or so, presumably while my OS is calling
> Bill Gates to tell him what I've been doing. This happens u
Paul Probert wrote:
> Hi,
> My app runs in a loop looking for changes in a database, and like a
> good boy I call time.sleep(1) inside the loop. Unfortunately this
> sometimes runs for 200 seconds or so, presumably while my OS is calling
> Bill Gates to tell him what I've been doing. This happ
Paul Probert wrote:
> Hi, My app runs in a loop looking for changes in a database, and like
> a good boy I call time.sleep(1) inside the loop. Unfortunately this
> sometimes runs for 200 seconds or so, presumably while my OS is
> calling Bill Gates to tell him what I've been doing. This happens
Hi,
My app runs in a loop looking for changes in a database, and like a
good boy I call time.sleep(1) inside the loop. Unfortunately this
sometimes runs for 200 seconds or so, presumably while my OS is calling
Bill Gates to tell him what I've been doing. This happens under NT4,
W2k, and XP.
31 matches
Mail list logo
