I am working on a Python script that Will work as a server on my Linux machine,
I am using the ZMQ library :
Here's what I want to achieve:
Server receives the payload
Server starts another thread and passes the socket and the payload
While the second thread is handling the data, the first must be already listening for another request
When the second thread finishes, it must send back the reply.
I tried that but I get zmq.error.ZMQError: Operation cannot be accomplished in current state
After a little research I found out that the ZMQ is not thread safe, it means that you cannot share the socket between the threads.
I tried the script without multithreading and it's working perfectly.
So How can I do that ?
Code:
#!/bin/python
import json
import threading
import time
import zmq
import os
import functions # <-- This my script functions.py
if not __name__ == "__main__":exit()
os.chdir("/home/youssef/python")
context = zmq.Context()
socket = context.socket(zmq.REP)
socket.bind("tcp://*:5555")
def run(data):
global socket
data = json.loads(data)
func = functions.match_action(data["action"])
del data["action"]
mess = func(data)
socket.send(mess.encode("utf-8")) # <-- here's the reply
while True:
# Wait for next request from client
data = socket.recv().decode("utf-8")
threading.Thread(target = run, args=(data,)).start()
Related
The telegram bot I'm making can execute a function that takes a few minutes to process and I'd like to be able to continue to use the bot while it's processing the function.
I'm using aiogram, asyncio and I tried using Python threading to make this possible.
The code I currently have is:
import asyncio
from queue import Queue
from threading import Thread
import time
import logging
from aiogram import Bot, types
from aiogram.types.message import ContentType
from aiogram.contrib.middlewares.logging import LoggingMiddleware
from aiogram.contrib.fsm_storage.memory import MemoryStorage
from aiogram.dispatcher import Dispatcher, FSMContext
from aiogram.utils.executor import start_webhook
from aiogram.types import InputFile
...
loop = asyncio.get_event_loop()
bot = Bot(token=BOT_TOKEN, loop=loop)
dp = Dispatcher(bot, storage=MemoryStorage())
dp.middleware.setup(LoggingMiddleware())
task_queue = Queue()
...
async def send_result(id):
logging.warning("entered send_result function")
image_res = InputFile(path_or_bytesio="images/result/res.jpg")
await bot.send_photo(id, image_res, FINISHED_MESSAGE)
def queue_processing():
while True:
if not task_queue.empty():
task = task_queue.get()
if task["type"] == "nst":
nst.run(task["style"], task["content"])
send_fut = asyncio.run_coroutine_threadsafe(send_result(task['id']), loop)
send_fut.result()
task_queue.task_done()
time.sleep(2)
if __name__ == "__main__":
executor_images = Thread(target=queue_processing, args=())
executor_images.start()
start_webhook(
dispatcher=dp,
webhook_path=WEBHOOK_PATH,
skip_updates=False,
on_startup=on_startup,
host=WEBAPP_HOST,
port=WEBAPP_PORT,
)
So I'm trying to setup a separate thread that's running a loop that is processing a queue of slow tasks thus allowing to continue chatting with the bot in the meantime and which would send the result message (image) to the chat after it's finished with a task.
However, this doesn't work. My friend came up with this solution while doing a similar task about a year ago, and it does work in his bot, but it doesn't seem to work in mine.
Judging by logs, it never even enters the send_result function, because the warning never comes through. The second thread does work properly though and the result image is saved and is located in its assigned path by the time nst.run finishes working.
I tried A LOT of different things and I'm very puzzled why this solution doesn't work for me because it does work with another bot. For example, I tried using asyncio.create_task instead of asyncio.run_coroutine_threadsafe, but to no avail.
To my understanding, you don't need to pass a loop to aiogram's Bot or Dispatcher anymore, but in that case I don't know how to send a task to the main thread from the second one.
Versions I'm using: aiogram 2.18, asyncio 3.4.3, Python 3.9.10.
Solved, the issue was that you can't access the bot's loop directly (with bot.loop or dp.loop) even if you pass your own asyncio loop to the bot or the dispatcher.
So the solution was to access the main thread's loop by using asyncio.get_event_loop() (which returns currently running loop, if there's one) from within one of the message handlers, because the loop is running at this point, and pass it to asyncio.run_coroutine_threadsafe (I used the "task" dictionary for that) like this: asyncio.run_coroutine_threadsafe(send_result(task['id']), task['loop']).
I'm trying to display an interactive mesh visualizer based on Three.js inside a Jupyter cell. The workflow is the following:
The user launches a Jupyter notebook, and open the viewer in a cell
Using Python commands, the user can manually add meshes and animate them interactively
In practice, the main thread is sending requests to a server via ZMQ sockets (every request needs a single reply), then the server sends back the desired data to the main thread using other socket pairs (many "request", very few replies expected), which finally uses communication through ipython kernel to send the data to the Javascript frontend. So far so good, and it works properly because the messages are all flowing in the same direction:
Main thread (Python command) [ZMQ REQ] -> [ZMQ REP] Server (Data) [ZMQ XREQ] -> [ZMQ XREQ] Main thread (Data) [IPykernel Comm] -> [Ipykernel Comm] Javascript (Display)
However, the pattern is different when I'm want to fetch the status of the frontend to wait for the meshes to finish loading:
Main thread (Status request) --> Server (Status request) --> Main thread (Waiting for reply)
| |
<--------------------------------Javascript (Processing) <--
This time, the server sends a request to the frontend, which in return does not send the reply directly back to the server, but to the main thread, that will forward the reply to the server, and finally to the main thread.
There is a clear issue: the main thread is supposed to jointly forward the reply of the frontend and receive the reply from the server, which is impossible. The ideal solution would be to enable the server to communicate directly with the frontend but I don't know how to do that, since I cannot use get_ipython().kernel.comm_manager.register_target on the server side. I tried to instantiate an ipython kernel client on the server side using jupyter_client.BlockingKernelClient, but I didn't manged to use it to communicate nor to register targets.
OK so I found a solution for now but it is not great. Indeed of just waiting for a reply and keep busy the main loop, I added a timeout and interleave it with do_one_iteration of the kernel to force to handle to messages:
while True:
try:
rep = zmq_socket.recv(flags=zmq.NOBLOCK).decode("utf-8")
except zmq.error.ZMQError:
kernel.do_one_iteration()
It works but unfortunately it is not really portable and it messes up with the Jupyter evaluation stack (all queued evaluations will be processed here instead of in order)...
Alternatively, there is another way that is more appealing:
import zmq
import asyncio
import nest_asyncio
nest_asyncio.apply()
zmq_socket.send(b"ready")
async def enforce_receive():
await kernel.process_one(True)
return zmq_socket.recv().decode("utf-8")
loop = asyncio.get_event_loop()
rep = loop.run_until_complete(enforce_receive())
but in this case you need to know in advance that you expect the kernel to receive exactly one message, and relying on nest_asyncio is not ideal either.
Here is a link to an issue on this topic of Github, along with an example notebook.
UPDATE
I finally manage to solve completely my issue, without shortcomings. The trick is to analyze every incoming messages. The irrelevant messages are put back in the queue in order, while the comm-related ones are processed on-the-spot:
class CommProcessor:
"""
#brief Re-implementation of ipykernel.kernelbase.do_one_iteration
to only handle comm messages on the spot, and put back in
the stack the other ones.
#details Calling 'do_one_iteration' messes up with kernel
'msg_queue'. Some messages will be processed too soon,
which is likely to corrupt the kernel state. This method
only processes comm messages to avoid such side effects.
"""
def __init__(self):
self.__kernel = get_ipython().kernel
self.qsize_old = 0
def __call__(self, unsafe=False):
"""
#brief Check once if there is pending comm related event in
the shell stream message priority queue.
#param[in] unsafe Whether or not to assume check if the number
of pending message has changed is enough. It
makes the evaluation much faster but flawed.
"""
# Flush every IN messages on shell_stream only
# Note that it is a faster implementation of ZMQStream.flush
# to only handle incoming messages. It reduces the computation
# time from about 10us to 20ns.
# https://github.com/zeromq/pyzmq/blob/e424f83ceb0856204c96b1abac93a1cfe205df4a/zmq/eventloop/zmqstream.py#L313
shell_stream = self.__kernel.shell_streams[0]
shell_stream.poller.register(shell_stream.socket, zmq.POLLIN)
events = shell_stream.poller.poll(0)
while events:
_, event = events[0]
if event:
shell_stream._handle_recv()
shell_stream.poller.register(
shell_stream.socket, zmq.POLLIN)
events = shell_stream.poller.poll(0)
qsize = self.__kernel.msg_queue.qsize()
if unsafe and qsize == self.qsize_old:
# The number of queued messages in the queue has not changed
# since it last time it has been checked. Assuming those
# messages are the same has before and returning earlier.
return
# One must go through all the messages to keep them in order
for _ in range(qsize):
priority, t, dispatch, args = \
self.__kernel.msg_queue.get_nowait()
if priority <= SHELL_PRIORITY:
_, msg = self.__kernel.session.feed_identities(
args[-1], copy=False)
msg = self.__kernel.session.deserialize(
msg, content=False, copy=False)
else:
# Do not spend time analyzing already rejected message
msg = None
if msg is None or not 'comm_' in msg['header']['msg_type']:
# The message is not related to comm, so putting it back in
# the queue after lowering its priority so that it is send
# at the "end of the queue", ie just at the right place:
# after the next unchecked messages, after the other
# messages already put back in the queue, but before the
# next one to go the same way. Note that every shell
# messages have SHELL_PRIORITY by default.
self.__kernel.msg_queue.put_nowait(
(SHELL_PRIORITY + 1, t, dispatch, args))
else:
# Comm message. Processing it right now.
comm_handler = getattr(
self.__kernel.comm_manager, msg['header']['msg_type'])
msg['content'] = self.__kernel.session.unpack(msg['content'])
comm_handler(None, None, msg)
self.qsize_old = self.__kernel.msg_queue.qsize()
process_kernel_comm = CommProcessor()
I am using CherryPy to speak to an authentication server. The script runs fine if all the inputted information is fine. But if they make an mistake typing their ID the internal HTTP error screen fires ok, but the server keeps running and nothing else in the script will run until the CherryPy engine is closed so I have to manually kill the script. Is there some code I can put in the index along the lines of
if timer >10 and connections == 0:
close cherrypy (< I have a method for this already)
Im mostly a data mangler, so not used to web servers. Googling shows lost of hits for closing CherryPy when there are too many connections but not when there have been no connections for a specified (short) time. I realise the point of a web server is usually to hang around waiting for connections, so this may be an odd case. All the same, any help welcome.
Interesting use case, you can use the CherryPy plugins infrastrcuture to do something like that, take a look at this ActivityMonitor plugin implementation, it shutdowns the server if is not handling anything and haven't seen any request in a specified amount of time (in this case 10 seconds).
Maybe you have to adjust the logic on how to shut it down or do anything else in the _verify method.
If you want to read a bit more about the publish/subscribe architecture take a look at the CherryPy Docs.
import time
import threading
import cherrypy
from cherrypy.process.plugins import Monitor
class ActivityMonitor(Monitor):
def __init__(self, bus, wait_time, monitor_time=None):
"""
bus: cherrypy.engine
wait_time: Seconds since last request that we consider to be active.
monitor_time: Seconds that we'll wait before verifying the activity.
If is not defined, wait half the `wait_time`.
"""
if monitor_time is None:
# if monitor time is not defined, then verify half
# the wait time since the last request
monitor_time = wait_time / 2
super().__init__(
bus, self._verify, monitor_time, self.__class__.__name__
)
# use a lock to make sure the thread that triggers the before_request
# and after_request does not collide with the monitor method (_verify)
self._active_request_lock = threading.Lock()
self._active_requests = 0
self._wait_time = wait_time
self._last_request_ts = time.time()
def _verify(self):
# verify that we don't have any active requests and
# shutdown the server in case we haven't seen any activity
# since self._last_request_ts + self._wait_time
with self._active_request_lock:
if (not self._active_requests and
self._last_request_ts + self._wait_time < time.time()):
self.bus.exit() # shutdown the engine
def before_request(self):
with self._active_request_lock:
self._active_requests += 1
def after_request(self):
with self._active_request_lock:
self._active_requests -= 1
# update the last time a request was served
self._last_request_ts = time.time()
class Root:
#cherrypy.expose
def index(self):
return "Hello user: current time {:.0f}".format(time.time())
def main():
# here is how to use the plugin:
ActivityMonitor(cherrypy.engine, wait_time=10, monitor_time=5).subscribe()
cherrypy.quickstart(Root())
if __name__ == '__main__':
main()
using python 3, I'm trying to send a file from a server to a client as soon as the client connects to the server, problem is that the client do only continue from recv when I close it (when the connection is closed)
I'm running the client in blender game engine, the client is running until it gets to recv, then it just stops, until i exit the game engine, then I can see that the console is receiving the bytes expected.
from other threads I have read that this might be bco the recv never gets an end, that's why I added "\n\r" to the end of my bytearray that the server is sending. but still, the client just stops at recv until I exit the application.
in the code below I'm only sending the first 6 bytes, these are to tell the client the size of the file. after this i intend to send data of the file on the same connection.
what am I doing wrong here?
client:
import socket
import threading
def TcpConnection():
TCPsocket = socket.socket(socket.AF_INET, socket.SOCK_STREAM)
TCPsocket.setsockopt(socket.IPPROTO_TCP, socket.TCP_NODELAY, 1)
server_address = ('localhost', 1338)
TCPsocket.connect(server_address)
print("TCP Socket open!, starting thread!")
ServerResponse = threading.Thread(target=TcpReciveMessageThread,args=(TCPsocket,))
ServerResponse.daemon = True
ServerResponse.start()
def TcpReciveMessageThread(Sock):
print("Tcp thread running!")
size = Sock.recv(6)#Sock.MSG_WAITALL
print("Recived data", size)
Sock.close()
Server:
import threading
import socket
import os
def StartTcpSocket():
server_socket = socket.socket(socket.AF_INET, socket.SOCK_STREAM)
server_socket.bind(('localhost', 1338))
server_socket.listen(10)
while 1:
connection, client_address = server_socket.accept()
Response = threading.Thread(target=StartTcpClientThread,args=(connection,))
Response.daemon = True # thread dies when main thread (only non-daemon thread) exits.
Response.start()
def StartTcpClientThread(socket):
print("Sending data")
length = 42
l1 = ToByts(length)
socket.send(l1)
#loop that sends the file goes here
print("Data sent")
#socket.close()
def ToByts(Size):
byt_res = (Size).to_bytes(4,byteorder='big')
result = bytearray()
for r in byt_res:
result.append(r)
t = bytearray("\r\n","utf-8")
for b in t:
result.append(b)
return result
MessageListener = threading.Thread(target=StartTcpSocket)
MessageListener.daemon = True # thread dies when main thread (only non-daemon thread) exits.
MessageListener.start()
while 1:
pass
if the problem is that the client don't find a end of the stream, then how can solve this without closing the connection, as I intend to send the file on the same connection.
Update #1:
to clarify, the print in the client that say "recived" is printed first when I exit the ge (the client is closing). The loop that sends the file and recives it where left out of the question as they are not the problem. the problem still occurs without them, client freeze at recv until it is closed.
Update #2:
here are a image of what my consoles are printing when i run the server and client:
as you can see it is never printing the "Recived" print
when i exit the blender game engine, I get this output:
now, when the engine and the server script is exited/closed/finished i get the data printed. so recv is probably pausing the thread until the socket is closed, why are it doing this? and how can i get my data (and the print) before the socket is closing? This also happens if I set
ServerResponse.daemon = False
here are a .blend (on mediafire) of the client, the server running on python 3 (pypy). I'm using blender 2.78a
Update #3:
I tested and verified that the problem is the same on windows 10 and linux mint. I also made a Video showing the problem:
In the video you can see how I only receive data from the server when i exit blender ge. After some research I besinning to suspect that the problem is related to python threading not playing well with the bge.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T5l9YGIoDYA
I have observed a similar phenomenon. It appears that the Python instance doesn't receive any execution cycles from Blender Game Engine (BGE) unless a controller gets invoked.
A simple solution is:
Add another Always sensor that is fired on every logic tick.
Add another Python controller that does nothing, a no-op.
Hook the sensor to the controller.
I applied this to your .blend as shown in the following screen capture.
I tested it by running your server and it seems to work OK.
Cheers, Jim
All, I'm implementing websockets using flask/uWSGI. This is relegated to a module that's instantiated in the main application. Redacted code for the server and module:
main.py
from WSModule import WSModule
app = Flask(__name__)
wsmodule = WSModule()
websock = WebSocket(app)
#websock.route('/websocket')
def echo(ws):
wsmodule.register(ws)
print("websock clients", wsmodule.clients)
while True: # This while loop is related to the uWSGI websocket implementation
msg = ws.receive()
if msg is not None:
ws.send(msg)
else: return
#app.before_request
def before_request():
print ("app clients:",wsmodule.clients)
and WSModule.py:
class WSModule(object):
def __init__(self):
self.clients = list()
def register(self, client):
self.clients.append(client)
Problem: When a user connects using websockets (into the '/websocket' route), the wsmodule.register appends their connection socket, this works fine- printout 'websocket clients' shows the appended connection.
The issue is that I can't access those sockets from the main application. This is seen by the 'app clients' printout which never updates (list stays empty). Something is clearly updating, but how to access those changes?
It sounds like your program is being run with either threads or processes, and a wsmodule exists for each thread/process that is running.
So one wsmodule is being updated with the client info, while a different one is being asked for clients... but the one being asked is still empty.
If you are using threads, check out thread local storage.