pool

I'm trying to deliver work when a page is appended to the pages list, but my code output returns a NotImplementedError. Here is the code with what I'm trying to do: Code: from multiprocessing import Pool, current_process import time import random import copy_reg import types import threading class PageControler(object): def __init__(self): self.nProcess = 3 self.pages = [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10] self.manageWork() def manageWork(self): self.pool = Pool(processes=self.nProcess) time.sleep(2) work_queue = threading.Thread(target=self.modifyQueue) work_queue.start() #pool.close() #pool.join() def

I was curious as to why Strings can be created without a call to new String() , as the API mentions it is an Object of class java.lang.String So how are we able to use String s="hi" rather than String s=new String("hi") ? This post clarified the use of == operator and absence of new and says this is due to String literals being interned or taken from a literal pool by the JVM , hence Strings are immutable. On seeing a statement such as String s="hi" for the first time what really takes place ? Does the JVM replace it like this String s=new String("hi") , wherein an Object is created and "hi"

I'm doing research on GenericObjectPool by putting Cipher in pool so it can be reused. GenericObjectPool<Cipher> pool; CipherFactory factory = new CipherFactory(); this.pool = new GenericObjectPool<Cipher>(factory); pool.setMaxTotal(10); pool.setBlockWhenExhausted(true); pool.setMaxWaitMillis(30 * 1000); CipherFactory public class CipherFactory extends BasePooledObjectFactory<Cipher> { private boolean running = false; @Override public Cipher create() throws Exception { return Cipher.getInstance("DESede/CBC/NoPadding"); } @Override public PooledObject<Cipher> wrap(Cipher arg0) { return new

When you map an iterable to a multiprocessing.Pool are the iterations divided into a queue for each process in the pool at the start, or is there a common queue from which a task is taken when a process comes free? def generate_stuff(): for foo in range(100): yield foo def process(moo): print moo pool = multiprocessing.Pool() pool.map(func=process, iterable=generate_stuff()) pool.close() So given this untested suggestion code; if there are 4 processes in the pool does each process get allocated 25 stuffs to do, or do the 100 stuffs get picked off one by one by processes looking for stuff to do

When you map an iterable to a multiprocessing.Pool are the iterations divided into a queue for each process in the pool at the start, or is there a common queue from which a task is taken when a process comes free? def generate_stuff(): for foo in range(100): yield foo def process(moo): print moo pool = multiprocessing.Pool() pool.map(func=process, iterable=generate_stuff()) pool.close() So given this untested suggestion code; if there are 4 processes in the pool does each process get allocated 25 stuffs to do, or do the 100 stuffs get picked off one by one by processes looking for stuff to do

Why may this happen? The thing is that monitor object is not null for sure, but still we get this exception quite often: java.lang.IllegalMonitorStateException: (m=null) Failed to get monitor for (tIdx=60) at java.lang.Object.wait(Object.java:474) at ... The code that provokes this is a simple pool solution: public Object takeObject() { Object obj = internalTakeObject(); while (obj == null) { try { available.wait(); } catch (InterruptedException e) { throw new RuntimeException(e); } obj = internalTakeObject(); } return obj; } private Object internalTakeObject() { Object obj = null;

I'm working on a renderfarm, and I need my clients to be able to launch multiple instances of a renderer, without blocking so the client can receive new commands. I've got that working correctly, however I'm having trouble terminating the created processes. At the global level, I define my pool (so that I can access it from any function): p = Pool(2) I then call my renderer with apply_async: for i in range(totalInstances): p.apply_async(render, (allRenderArgs[i],args[2]), callback=renderFinished) p.close() That function finishes, launches the processes in the background, and waits for new

I'm having fun with c++-ideas, and got a little stuck with this problem. I would like a LIFO class that manages a pool of resources. When a resource is requested (through acquire() ), it returns the object as a unique_ptr that, upon deletion, causes the resource to be returned to the pool. The unit tests would be: // Create the pool, that holds (for simplicity, int objects) SharedPool<int> pool; TS_ASSERT(pool.empty()); // Add an object to the pool, which is now, no longer empty pool.add(std::unique_ptr<int>(new int(42))); TS_ASSERT(!pool.empty()); // Pop this object within its own scope,