in reply to Re: Parallel::ForkManager run_on_finish exit code handler
in thread Parallel::ForkManager run_on_finish exit code handler

Okay, I spoke too soon. Accessing a hash defined in the parent IS read/writable from run_on_finish().

my %rc_hash = (); my $MAX_PROCESSES = 120; my $pm = new Parallel::ForkManager($MAX_PROCESSES); $pm->run_on_finish( sub { my ($pid, $exit_code, $ident) = @_; print "run_on_finish: $ident (pid: $pid) exited " . "with cod +e: [$exit_code]\n"; $rc_hash{$pid} = $exit_code; } ); $pm->run_on_start( sub { my ($pid,$ident)=@_; print "** $ident started, pid: $pid\n"; } ); for(my $i=0; $i< @hosts; $i++){ $pm->start($hosts[$i]) and next; system(@some_command); $return_code = $? >> 8; $pm->finish($return_code); } foreach my $key (keys %rc_hash){ print "$key => $rc_hash{$key}\n"; }

I made an incorrect assumption.. What I was trying to do earlier is use a database handle from run_on_finish() and that didn't work, so I thought it applied to all other variables. I am not sure why accessing a hash would work, but accessing a db handle wouldn't. Is this possible?

my $dbh = DBI->connect("DBI:mysql:database=mydb;host=$DB", "user", +"pass", {'RaiseError' => 1}); my $MAX_PROCESSES = 120; my $pm = new Parallel::ForkManager($MAX_PROCESSES); $pm->run_on_finish( sub { my ($pid, $exit_code, $ident) = @_; print "run_on_finish: $ident (pid: $pid) exited " . "with +code: [$exit_code]\n"; insert_into_db(\$dbh, $pid, $exit_code); + } ); $pm->run_on_start( sub { my ($pid,$ident)=@_; print "** $ident started, pid: $pid\n"; } ); for(my $i=0; $i< @hosts; $i++){ $pm->start($hosts[$i]) and next; system(@some_command); $return_code = $? >> 8; $pm->finish($return_code); } $dbh->disconnect(); sub insert_into_db{ my $dbhdl = shift; my $pid = shift; my $ret_code = shift; $$dbhdl->do(INSERT INTO system_results ... .. ); }

If I can't use the db handle from run_on_finish(), I can still add the return code to %rc_hash and process them after $pm->finish(). Is this the right thing to do? thanks for the speedy responses. I hope I explained my problem a little better this time around.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Parallel::ForkManager run_on_finish exit code handler
by ikegami (Patriarch) on Sep 08, 2009 at 16:57 UTC

    What I was trying to do earlier is use a database handle from run_on_finish()

    The child inherited the database handle and closed it. P::FM uses exit when it should probably use POSIX's _exit. finish is simply a call to exec, so if you call _exec instead of finish, that problem should go away.

    That means you should replace

    for(my $i=0; $i< @hosts; $i++){ $pm->start($hosts[$i]) and next; system(@some_command); $return_code = $? >> 8; $pm->finish($return_code); }
    with
    use POSIX qw( _exit ); for(my $i=0; $i< @hosts; $i++){ $pm->start($hosts[$i]) and next; system(@some_command); $return_code = $? >> 8; _exit($return_code); }

    Of course, system + _exit is a silly way of doing exec, so you get:

    for my $host (@hosts) { $pm->start($host) and next; exec(@some_command); }

    Error checking added:

    for my $host (@hosts) { $pm->start($host) and next; exec(@some_command); print(STDERR "exec failed: $!\n"); _exit($!); }

    That also fixes the bug where you'd return zero (success) when the child died from a signal.

    Update: Clean up.

      ikegami - Thanks. The following code works.

      for my $host (@hosts) { $pm->start($host) and next; exec(@some_command); print(STDERR "exec failed: $!\n"); _exit($!); }

      The database connection is now persistent in run_on_finish(), and I am able to insert the return code into the db from the callback routine.

      Thinking of the Chinese proverb.. give a man a fish.. teach a man to fish.. Rather than me just blindly accepting the code improvement, can you explain how run_on_finish() gets the return code without having $return_code passed in as either $pm->finish($return_code) or _exit($return_code) ?

      Also, why is 'exec' preferred over 'system + _exit' ? I thought exec executes a system command and never returns.. I am surprised that this works actually.

        Your premise that the child process doesn't call exit is wrong. Either it exited properly by calling exit with an exit code (setting $?'s high byte) or it was terminated by a signal (setting $?'s low byte). There's no other way for it to exit.

        I thought exec executes a system command and never returns..

        Same goes for the call to exit it's replacing.

        Also, why is 'exec' preferred over 'system + _exit' ?

        You're creating a process whose sole purpose is to do nothing but create a process, and you're doing that for as many hosts as you have in your array. It's wasteful! It also requires more code and introduces problems (refer to the bug I mentioned it fixed).