Message346610
@Andrew Svetlov
> Adding a new state for "not running and not pending but something in between" is useless
I have not suggested that. I have just reported that when the number of submitted calls is strictly greater than the number of pool worker processes, the number of RUNNING calls returned by the method `Future.running()` makes no sense. Probably because the current `ProcessPoolExecutor` implementation uses 2 PENDING stores (the `_pending_work_items` `dict` and the `call_queue` `multiprocessing.Queue`) but treats the second store as a RUNNING store, contrary to the `ThreadPoolExecutor` implementation which has only 1 PENDING store (the `_work_queue` `queue.SimpleQueue`). The proper thing to do would be to correct the current implementation, not to create a new future state of course. |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2019-06-26 12:21:49 | maggyero | set | recipients:
+ maggyero, bquinlan, pitrou, asvetlov, methane, lukasz.langa, serhiy.storchaka, willingc, pablogsal |
2019-06-26 12:21:49 | maggyero | set | messageid: <1561551709.57.0.58848574387.issue37276@roundup.psfhosted.org> |
2019-06-26 12:21:49 | maggyero | link | issue37276 messages |
2019-06-26 12:21:49 | maggyero | create | |
|