Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
gh-128041: Add a terminate_workers method to ProcessPoolExecutor #128043
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
gh-128041: Add a terminate_workers method to ProcessPoolExecutor #128043
Changes from all commits
47b162a
6ef8833
61c9b14
3bf5464
4b285b8
b4939fd
ba6a4c0
5d58e50
0db381b
7ae1685
f7ad96c
2c0b578
a878221
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Actually, can we perhaps name it
kill
? (namely, you kill the pool's workers with the given signal) or iskill
already taken (possibly for something else in the future)?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm not sure. I thought this was explicit. I'm open for either or.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ok, so after some research:
Process.terminate
-- mimicsSIGTERM
Process.kill
-- sendsSIGKILL
to the process.Many other interfaces use
terminate
for sending SIGTERM andkill
for sendingSIGKILL
. Now, we also have multiprocessing.Pool.terminate, so maybe we could mimic it by just naming itterminate(signal=...)
? It would be slightly inconsistent with the othersterminate
methods since this one would be able to send a SIGKILL as well.So it's up to you (or up to Gregory)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I could definitely be down for
terminate
to match multiprocessing.Pool. (Though i'd still like to be able to change the signal sent so it would be a slight api difference). I'll wait to see what Gregory thinks to either change it or leave as is.