GeezerVisonThe World Wide Web, restored to 800 pixels of glory. | ||||||
| Home|About|Gaming cabinet|Archives|How it works|Starter sites | ||||||
GeezerVison is showing github.com — gh-91607: Fix several test_concurrent_futures tests to actually test what they claim by gpshead · Pull Request #91600 · python/cpython Conversation
Member
Many ProcessPoolExecutor based tests were ignoring the mp_context Also removes the old
Sorry, something went wrong. Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page. All reactionsMany ProcessPoolExecutor based tests were ignoring the mp_context and using the default instead. This meant we lacked proper test coverage of all of them. Also removes the old _prime_executor() worker delay seeding code as it appears to have no point and causes 20-30 seconds extra latency on this already long test. It also interfered with some of the refactoring to fix the above to not needlessly create their own executor when setUp has already created an appropriate one.
Member
Author
All reactions
Sorry, something went wrong. Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
All reactions
Sorry, something went wrong. Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
All reactions
Sorry, something went wrong. Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Contributor
All reactions
Sorry, something went wrong. Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Contributor
All reactions
Sorry, something went wrong. Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Contributor
All reactions
Sorry, something went wrong. Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
gpshead
added a commit
to gpshead/cpython
that referenced
this pull request
…ctually test what they claim (pythonGH-91600) * Fix test_concurrent_futures to actually test what it says. Many ProcessPoolExecutor based tests were ignoring the mp_context and using the default instead. This meant we lacked proper test coverage of all of them. Also removes the old _prime_executor() worker delay seeding code as it appears to have no point and causes 20-30 seconds extra latency on this already long test. It also interfered with some of the refactoring to fix the above to not needlessly create their own executor when setUp has already created an appropriate one. * Don't import the name from multiprocessing directly to avoid confusion. * 📜🤖 Added by blurb_it. Co-authored-by: blurb-it[bot] <43283697+blurb-it[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>. (cherry picked from commit 7fa3a5a) Co-authored-by: Gregory P. Smith <[email protected]>
gpshead
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
…y test what they claim (GH-91600) (#91612) * Fix test_concurrent_futures to actually test what it says. Many ProcessPoolExecutor based tests were ignoring the mp_context and using the default instead. This meant we lacked proper test coverage of all of them. Also removes the old _prime_executor() worker delay seeding code as it appears to have no point and causes 20-30 seconds extra latency on this already long test. It also interfered with some of the refactoring to fix the above to not needlessly create their own executor when setUp has already created an appropriate one. * Don't import the name from multiprocessing directly to avoid confusion. (cherry picked from commit 7fa3a5a) Co-authored-by: Gregory P. Smith <[email protected]>
gpshead
added a commit
to gpshead/cpython
that referenced
this pull request
…s to actually test what they claim (pythonGH-91600) (pythonGH-91612) * Fix test_concurrent_futures to actually test what it says. Many ProcessPoolExecutor based tests were ignoring the mp_context and using the default instead. This meant we lacked proper test coverage of all of them. Also removes the old _prime_executor() worker delay seeding code as it appears to have no point and causes 20-30 seconds extra latency on this already long test. It also interfered with some of the refactoring to fix the above to not needlessly create their own executor when setUp has already created an appropriate one. * Don't import the name from multiprocessing directly to avoid confusion. (cherry picked from commit 7fa3a5a) Co-authored-by: Gregory P. Smith <[email protected]>. (cherry picked from commit 9a45893) Co-authored-by: Gregory P. Smith <[email protected]>
gpshead
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
…ctually test what they claim (GH-91600) (GH-91612) (#91617) * Fix test_concurrent_futures to actually test what it says. Many ProcessPoolExecutor based tests were ignoring the mp_context and using the default instead. This meant we lacked proper test coverage of all of them. Also removes the old _prime_executor() worker delay seeding code as it appears to have no point and causes 20-30 seconds extra latency on this already long test. It also interfered with some of the refactoring to fix the above to not needlessly create their own executor when setUp has already created an appropriate one. * Don't import the name from multiprocessing directly to avoid confusion. (cherry picked from commit 7fa3a5a) (cherry picked from commit 9a45893)
hello-adam
pushed a commit
to hello-adam/cpython
that referenced
this pull request
…s to actually test what they claim (pythonGH-91600) (pythonGH-91612) (python#91617) * Fix test_concurrent_futures to actually test what it says. Many ProcessPoolExecutor based tests were ignoring the mp_context and using the default instead. This meant we lacked proper test coverage of all of them. Also removes the old _prime_executor() worker delay seeding code as it appears to have no point and causes 20-30 seconds extra latency on this already long test. It also interfered with some of the refactoring to fix the above to not needlessly create their own executor when setUp has already created an appropriate one. * Don't import the name from multiprocessing directly to avoid confusion. (cherry picked from commit 7fa3a5a) (cherry picked from commit 9a45893)
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
ReviewersUh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page. AssigneesProjectsMilestoneNo milestoneDevelopmentSuccessfully merging this pull request may close these issues. test_concurrent_futures does not exercise each mp_context method reliably due to code smellUh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page. 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. | ||||||
| You are visitor 01402503 — GeezerVison does not store the pages you look up. Best viewed with Netscape Navigator 4.7 or Internet Explorer 6 at 800×600. No cookies required. |