I believe that you can use QueueListener and QueueHandler to serialize the calls:
https://docs.python.org/3/library/logging.handlers.html#logg...
Neat Parallel Output in Python
41–47 of 47 posts
Re: Neat Parallel Output in Python
#42I don't like the wild use of globals, even if they are "guarded" by locks. And then, oh boy there're locks!
But, it surely works, so that's nice. It would be cool to have a small lib that solves this nicely :thinking:...
Re: Neat Parallel Output in Python
#43I believe that you can use QueueListener and QueueHandler to serialize the calls: https://docs.python.org/3/library/logging.handlers.html#logg...
Nice suggestion!
Re: Neat Parallel Output in Python
#44Nice idea. However, please note: `map(func, repos)` does not do anything. Your code does not do any processing. Try it. You need to consume the iterator that map returns. Please use Python as it is supposed to be used, not as Fortran.
Fixed; thanks
Re: Neat Parallel Output in Python
#45You probably don't want to run this gist directly. Looks like a risk of a runaway process creation, depending on the platform. The process creation code should be guarded by `if __name__ == "__main__"`.
What does this mean? Runaway?
Re: Neat Parallel Output in Python
#46Nice idea. However, please note: `map(func, repos)` does not do anything. Your code does not do any processing. Try it. You need to consume the iterator that map returns. Please use Python as it is supposed to be used, not as Fortran.
Lighten up.
Re: Neat Parallel Output in Python
#47I prefer using a purpose-built tool like GNU parallel. Parallel's only purpose is to run things in parallel and collect the results together. The advantage is you only have to learn to use it once, rather than learn to do this again and again in all the different languages/tools you might use.
Try:
parallel --latestline seq ::: {1..10}0000000