Using globally declared tuple for Python multiprocessing
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
I am having some trouble using a tuple globally with the multiprocessing class.
I have a code as produced below:
from multiprocessing import Pool
if __name__ == '__main__':
jj = ()
def f(x):
global jj
jj += (x*x,)
# Section A
#for ii in range(20):
# f(ii)
#print (jj)
# Section B
pool = Pool(processes=4)
pool.map(f, range(20))
pool.join()
print (jj)
If I run section only B, I get the tuple jj as an empty tuple. However, if I run only section A, I get a tuple of length 20.
Why is that so?
python python-3.x python-multiprocessing
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
I am having some trouble using a tuple globally with the multiprocessing class.
I have a code as produced below:
from multiprocessing import Pool
if __name__ == '__main__':
jj = ()
def f(x):
global jj
jj += (x*x,)
# Section A
#for ii in range(20):
# f(ii)
#print (jj)
# Section B
pool = Pool(processes=4)
pool.map(f, range(20))
pool.join()
print (jj)
If I run section only B, I get the tuple jj as an empty tuple. However, if I run only section A, I get a tuple of length 20.
Why is that so?
python python-3.x python-multiprocessing
Please run either section A or section B at a time. Comment out the other section not in use. I use tuple because in my original code, I have to store a lot of variables and I read that the instantiation of tuples is much faster than a list. I am not calling these values anywhere in the code.
– Shihab Khan
Nov 22 at 8:59
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
I am having some trouble using a tuple globally with the multiprocessing class.
I have a code as produced below:
from multiprocessing import Pool
if __name__ == '__main__':
jj = ()
def f(x):
global jj
jj += (x*x,)
# Section A
#for ii in range(20):
# f(ii)
#print (jj)
# Section B
pool = Pool(processes=4)
pool.map(f, range(20))
pool.join()
print (jj)
If I run section only B, I get the tuple jj as an empty tuple. However, if I run only section A, I get a tuple of length 20.
Why is that so?
python python-3.x python-multiprocessing
I am having some trouble using a tuple globally with the multiprocessing class.
I have a code as produced below:
from multiprocessing import Pool
if __name__ == '__main__':
jj = ()
def f(x):
global jj
jj += (x*x,)
# Section A
#for ii in range(20):
# f(ii)
#print (jj)
# Section B
pool = Pool(processes=4)
pool.map(f, range(20))
pool.join()
print (jj)
If I run section only B, I get the tuple jj as an empty tuple. However, if I run only section A, I get a tuple of length 20.
Why is that so?
python python-3.x python-multiprocessing
python python-3.x python-multiprocessing
edited Nov 22 at 9:00
asked Nov 22 at 8:45
Shihab Khan
227
227
Please run either section A or section B at a time. Comment out the other section not in use. I use tuple because in my original code, I have to store a lot of variables and I read that the instantiation of tuples is much faster than a list. I am not calling these values anywhere in the code.
– Shihab Khan
Nov 22 at 8:59
add a comment |
Please run either section A or section B at a time. Comment out the other section not in use. I use tuple because in my original code, I have to store a lot of variables and I read that the instantiation of tuples is much faster than a list. I am not calling these values anywhere in the code.
– Shihab Khan
Nov 22 at 8:59
Please run either section A or section B at a time. Comment out the other section not in use. I use tuple because in my original code, I have to store a lot of variables and I read that the instantiation of tuples is much faster than a list. I am not calling these values anywhere in the code.
– Shihab Khan
Nov 22 at 8:59
Please run either section A or section B at a time. Comment out the other section not in use. I use tuple because in my original code, I have to store a lot of variables and I read that the instantiation of tuples is much faster than a list. I am not calling these values anywhere in the code.
– Shihab Khan
Nov 22 at 8:59
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
Ok, as Python multiprocessing global variable updates not returned to parent explains, global state is not shared among processes.
You can share state using, for example, multiprocessing.Queue
.
from multiprocessing import Pool, Queue
if __name__ == "__main__":
jj = ()
q = Queue()
def f(x):
global jj
jj += (x * x,)
def f_multi(x):
q.put(x * x)
# Section A
for ii in range(20):
f(ii)
print(jj)
# Section B
pool = Pool(processes=4)
pool.map(f_multi, range(20))
pool.close()
stop = "STOP"
q.put(stop)
items =
for i in iter(q.get, stop):
items.append(i)
print(tuple(items))
Alternatively you can use print(tuple(sorted(items)))
to get the values in the same order as Section A
will produce. 4 processes are working on the task in Section B
and hence the "unordered" result.
Thanks a lot. Actually @Dušan, the problem which I am facing is that I don't have a single variable I'd have to put in a Queue. I have a function that generates a lot of data. I'm trying to store that data from each iteration so that I can use them later on for validating/checking my results. Is there any efficient way to do that? It seems to be that I'll have to do this for each of the variables.
– Shihab Khan
Nov 22 at 9:34
1
You can put all variables you want to return from your function to adict
and then put that dict to theQueue
, e.g.q.put({'data1': [1,2,3], 'data2': (0.5, 0.6)})
.
– Dušan Maďar
Nov 22 at 9:43
This sounds like a good idea. If I can make the function return this dictionary then I don't even have to use a queue.
– Shihab Khan
Nov 22 at 9:53
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
StackExchange.snippets.init();
});
});
}, "code-snippets");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53426937%2fusing-globally-declared-tuple-for-python-multiprocessing%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
Ok, as Python multiprocessing global variable updates not returned to parent explains, global state is not shared among processes.
You can share state using, for example, multiprocessing.Queue
.
from multiprocessing import Pool, Queue
if __name__ == "__main__":
jj = ()
q = Queue()
def f(x):
global jj
jj += (x * x,)
def f_multi(x):
q.put(x * x)
# Section A
for ii in range(20):
f(ii)
print(jj)
# Section B
pool = Pool(processes=4)
pool.map(f_multi, range(20))
pool.close()
stop = "STOP"
q.put(stop)
items =
for i in iter(q.get, stop):
items.append(i)
print(tuple(items))
Alternatively you can use print(tuple(sorted(items)))
to get the values in the same order as Section A
will produce. 4 processes are working on the task in Section B
and hence the "unordered" result.
Thanks a lot. Actually @Dušan, the problem which I am facing is that I don't have a single variable I'd have to put in a Queue. I have a function that generates a lot of data. I'm trying to store that data from each iteration so that I can use them later on for validating/checking my results. Is there any efficient way to do that? It seems to be that I'll have to do this for each of the variables.
– Shihab Khan
Nov 22 at 9:34
1
You can put all variables you want to return from your function to adict
and then put that dict to theQueue
, e.g.q.put({'data1': [1,2,3], 'data2': (0.5, 0.6)})
.
– Dušan Maďar
Nov 22 at 9:43
This sounds like a good idea. If I can make the function return this dictionary then I don't even have to use a queue.
– Shihab Khan
Nov 22 at 9:53
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
Ok, as Python multiprocessing global variable updates not returned to parent explains, global state is not shared among processes.
You can share state using, for example, multiprocessing.Queue
.
from multiprocessing import Pool, Queue
if __name__ == "__main__":
jj = ()
q = Queue()
def f(x):
global jj
jj += (x * x,)
def f_multi(x):
q.put(x * x)
# Section A
for ii in range(20):
f(ii)
print(jj)
# Section B
pool = Pool(processes=4)
pool.map(f_multi, range(20))
pool.close()
stop = "STOP"
q.put(stop)
items =
for i in iter(q.get, stop):
items.append(i)
print(tuple(items))
Alternatively you can use print(tuple(sorted(items)))
to get the values in the same order as Section A
will produce. 4 processes are working on the task in Section B
and hence the "unordered" result.
Thanks a lot. Actually @Dušan, the problem which I am facing is that I don't have a single variable I'd have to put in a Queue. I have a function that generates a lot of data. I'm trying to store that data from each iteration so that I can use them later on for validating/checking my results. Is there any efficient way to do that? It seems to be that I'll have to do this for each of the variables.
– Shihab Khan
Nov 22 at 9:34
1
You can put all variables you want to return from your function to adict
and then put that dict to theQueue
, e.g.q.put({'data1': [1,2,3], 'data2': (0.5, 0.6)})
.
– Dušan Maďar
Nov 22 at 9:43
This sounds like a good idea. If I can make the function return this dictionary then I don't even have to use a queue.
– Shihab Khan
Nov 22 at 9:53
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
Ok, as Python multiprocessing global variable updates not returned to parent explains, global state is not shared among processes.
You can share state using, for example, multiprocessing.Queue
.
from multiprocessing import Pool, Queue
if __name__ == "__main__":
jj = ()
q = Queue()
def f(x):
global jj
jj += (x * x,)
def f_multi(x):
q.put(x * x)
# Section A
for ii in range(20):
f(ii)
print(jj)
# Section B
pool = Pool(processes=4)
pool.map(f_multi, range(20))
pool.close()
stop = "STOP"
q.put(stop)
items =
for i in iter(q.get, stop):
items.append(i)
print(tuple(items))
Alternatively you can use print(tuple(sorted(items)))
to get the values in the same order as Section A
will produce. 4 processes are working on the task in Section B
and hence the "unordered" result.
Ok, as Python multiprocessing global variable updates not returned to parent explains, global state is not shared among processes.
You can share state using, for example, multiprocessing.Queue
.
from multiprocessing import Pool, Queue
if __name__ == "__main__":
jj = ()
q = Queue()
def f(x):
global jj
jj += (x * x,)
def f_multi(x):
q.put(x * x)
# Section A
for ii in range(20):
f(ii)
print(jj)
# Section B
pool = Pool(processes=4)
pool.map(f_multi, range(20))
pool.close()
stop = "STOP"
q.put(stop)
items =
for i in iter(q.get, stop):
items.append(i)
print(tuple(items))
Alternatively you can use print(tuple(sorted(items)))
to get the values in the same order as Section A
will produce. 4 processes are working on the task in Section B
and hence the "unordered" result.
edited Nov 22 at 9:32
answered Nov 22 at 9:26
Dušan Maďar
4,30741935
4,30741935
Thanks a lot. Actually @Dušan, the problem which I am facing is that I don't have a single variable I'd have to put in a Queue. I have a function that generates a lot of data. I'm trying to store that data from each iteration so that I can use them later on for validating/checking my results. Is there any efficient way to do that? It seems to be that I'll have to do this for each of the variables.
– Shihab Khan
Nov 22 at 9:34
1
You can put all variables you want to return from your function to adict
and then put that dict to theQueue
, e.g.q.put({'data1': [1,2,3], 'data2': (0.5, 0.6)})
.
– Dušan Maďar
Nov 22 at 9:43
This sounds like a good idea. If I can make the function return this dictionary then I don't even have to use a queue.
– Shihab Khan
Nov 22 at 9:53
add a comment |
Thanks a lot. Actually @Dušan, the problem which I am facing is that I don't have a single variable I'd have to put in a Queue. I have a function that generates a lot of data. I'm trying to store that data from each iteration so that I can use them later on for validating/checking my results. Is there any efficient way to do that? It seems to be that I'll have to do this for each of the variables.
– Shihab Khan
Nov 22 at 9:34
1
You can put all variables you want to return from your function to adict
and then put that dict to theQueue
, e.g.q.put({'data1': [1,2,3], 'data2': (0.5, 0.6)})
.
– Dušan Maďar
Nov 22 at 9:43
This sounds like a good idea. If I can make the function return this dictionary then I don't even have to use a queue.
– Shihab Khan
Nov 22 at 9:53
Thanks a lot. Actually @Dušan, the problem which I am facing is that I don't have a single variable I'd have to put in a Queue. I have a function that generates a lot of data. I'm trying to store that data from each iteration so that I can use them later on for validating/checking my results. Is there any efficient way to do that? It seems to be that I'll have to do this for each of the variables.
– Shihab Khan
Nov 22 at 9:34
Thanks a lot. Actually @Dušan, the problem which I am facing is that I don't have a single variable I'd have to put in a Queue. I have a function that generates a lot of data. I'm trying to store that data from each iteration so that I can use them later on for validating/checking my results. Is there any efficient way to do that? It seems to be that I'll have to do this for each of the variables.
– Shihab Khan
Nov 22 at 9:34
1
1
You can put all variables you want to return from your function to a
dict
and then put that dict to the Queue
, e.g. q.put({'data1': [1,2,3], 'data2': (0.5, 0.6)})
.– Dušan Maďar
Nov 22 at 9:43
You can put all variables you want to return from your function to a
dict
and then put that dict to the Queue
, e.g. q.put({'data1': [1,2,3], 'data2': (0.5, 0.6)})
.– Dušan Maďar
Nov 22 at 9:43
This sounds like a good idea. If I can make the function return this dictionary then I don't even have to use a queue.
– Shihab Khan
Nov 22 at 9:53
This sounds like a good idea. If I can make the function return this dictionary then I don't even have to use a queue.
– Shihab Khan
Nov 22 at 9:53
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53426937%2fusing-globally-declared-tuple-for-python-multiprocessing%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Please run either section A or section B at a time. Comment out the other section not in use. I use tuple because in my original code, I have to store a lot of variables and I read that the instantiation of tuples is much faster than a list. I am not calling these values anywhere in the code.
– Shihab Khan
Nov 22 at 8:59