Message 238226 - Python tracker

➜

This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub, and is currently read-only.
For more information, see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.

Author	vstinner
Recipients	neologix, pitrou, python-dev, vstinner
Date	2015-03-16.17:00:59
SpamBayes Score	-1.0
Marked as misclassified	Yes
Message-id	<CAMpsgwb1N7e1jk8_adAO+GLdb-GkBNd_xn77H_pkh3qX0uqjLQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-reply-to	<1426524068.73.0.264564987897.issue23680@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>

Content
2015-03-16 17:41 GMT+01:00 Antoine Pitrou <report@bugs.python.org>: > Note that PIPE_MAX_SIZE can be large. Perhaps move the memory allocation (i.e. `item * (support.PIPE_MAX_SIZE // len(item) + 1)`) before the alarm(1) call? Good idea, the first strace shows that SIGALRM was received while Python was creating the large data. I made this simple change. Can you tell me if my change fixes the issue? > Or what if alarm_interrupt is simply set up to retrigger the signal? It may make the test more reliable and I don't see how it can fix the issue showed in the strace. Feel free to make the test more reliable with such change if you want.

2015-03-16 17:41 GMT+01:00 Antoine Pitrou <report@bugs.python.org>:
> Note that PIPE_MAX_SIZE can be large. Perhaps move the memory allocation (i.e. `item * (support.PIPE_MAX_SIZE // len(item) + 1)`) before the alarm(1) call?

Good idea, the first strace shows that SIGALRM was received while
Python was creating the large data.

I made this simple change. Can you tell me if my change fixes the issue?

> Or what if alarm_interrupt is simply set up to retrigger the signal?

It may make the test more reliable and I don't see how it can fix the
issue showed in the strace. Feel free to make the test more reliable
with such change if you want.

History
Date	User	Action	Args
2015-03-16 17:00:59	vstinner	set	recipients: + vstinner, pitrou, neologix, python-dev
2015-03-16 17:00:59	vstinner	link	issue23680 messages
2015-03-16 17:00:59	vstinner	create