Stackless is a lightweight threading solution. It works by scheduling its tasklets within the CPU time allocated to the real thread that Python, and therefore the scheduler running within it, is on.
It does not:
- Magically move tasklets between threads to do some wonderful load balancing.
- Magically magic away the global interpreter lock.
- Solve all your scalability needs out of the box.
But it does allow its functionality to be used flexibly, when you want to make use of more than one thread.
The operating system thread that the Python runtime is started in and runs on, is called the main thread. The typical use of Stackless, is to run the scheduler in this thread. But there is nothing that prevents a different scheduler, and therefore a different set of tasklets, from running in every Python thread you care to start.
Remember that tasklets are in essence part of the thread they were created in, and there is no way to move tasklets between threads.
Example - scheduler per thread:
import threading import stackless def secondary_thread_func(): print "THREAD(2): Has", stackless.runcount, "tasklets in its scheduler" def main_thread_func(): print "THREAD(1): Waiting for death of THREAD(2)" while thread.is_alive(): stackless.schedule() print "THREAD(1): Death of THREAD(2) detected" mainThreadTasklet = stackless.tasklet(main_thread_func)() thread = threading.Thread(target=secondary_thread_func) thread.start() stackless.run()
THREAD(2): HasTHREAD(1): Waiting for death of THREAD(2) 1 tasklets in its scheduler THREAD(1): Death of THREAD(2) detected
This example demonstrates that there actually are two independent schedulers present, one in each participating Python thread. We know that the main thread has one manually created tasklet running, in addition to its main tasklet which is running the scheduler. If the secondary thread is truly independent, then when it runs it should have a tasklet count of 1 representing its own main tasklet. And this is indeed what we see.
Whether or not you are running a scheduler on multiple threads, you can still communicate with a thread that is running a scheduler using a channel object.
Example - interthread channel usage:
import threading import stackless commandChannel = stackless.channel() def master_func(): commandChannel.send("ECHO 1") commandChannel.send("ECHO 2") commandChannel.send("ECHO 3") commandChannel.send("QUIT") def slave_func(): print "SLAVE STARTING" while 1: command = commandChannel.receive() print "SLAVE:", command if command == "QUIT": break print "SLAVE ENDING" def scheduler_run(tasklet_func): t = stackless.tasklet(tasklet_func)() while t.alive: stackless.run() thread = threading.Thread(target=scheduler_run, args=(master_func,)) thread.start() scheduler_run(slave_func)
SLAVE STARTING SLAVE: ECHO 1 SLAVE: ECHO 2 SLAVE: ECHO 3 SLAVE: QUIT SLAVE ENDING
This example runs slave_func as a tasklet on the main thread, and master_func as a tasklet on a secondary thread that is manually created. The idea is that the master thread tells the slave thread what to do, with a QUIT message meaning that it should exit.
The reason the scheduler is repeatedly run in a loop, is because when a scheduler has no remaining tasklets scheduled within it, it will exit. As there is only one tasklet in each thread, as each channel operation in the thread blocks the calling tasklet, the scheduler will exit. Linking how long the scheduler is driven to the lifetime of all tasklets that it handles, ensures correct behaviour.