Styjun

Doing research in academia and not liking competition

What is this welding tool I found in my attic?

What are some symbols representing peasants/oppressed persons fighting back?

Can I intentionally omit previous work experience or pretend it doesn't exist when applying for jobs?

How do a planet's moons and a planet's rings interact?

Data standardization vs. normalization for clustering analysis

What is temperature on a quantum level?

Cubic programming and beyond?

Why would an Inquisitive rogue choose to use Insightful Fighting as opposed to using their Cunning Action to Hide?

CPU overheating in Ubuntu 18.04

Too many spies!

Is `curl something | sudo bash -` a reasonably safe installation method?

Professor falsely accusing me of cheating in a class he does not teach, two months after end of the class. What precautions should I take?

Why is dry soil hydrophobic? Bad gardener paradox

Alternatives to using writing paper for writing practice

How do I write a romance that doesn't look obvious

Would letting a multiclass character rebuild their character to be single-classed be game-breaking?

What is the German equivalent of 干物女 (dried fish woman)?

Report how much space is used and available in storage in ZFS on FreeBSD

Find the wrong number in the given series: 6, 12, 21, 36, 56, 81?

Was adding milk to tea started to reduce employee tea break time?

Supporting developers who insist on using their pet language

Why does the autopilot disengage even when it does not receive pilot input?

How does one stock fund's charge of 1% more in operating expenses than another fund lower expected returns by 10%?

Store multiple items in IPC::ShareLite object

The difference between fork(), vfork(), exec() and clone()Notify multiple listeners after an object changesWhat is the preferred cross-platform IPC Perl module?IPC::Shareable store hash of hashesShould we detach shared memory before termination of a forked processMessage queue for IPC with fork and want to know whether the processes 'share' the message buffer or just copy and 'show' to the other processshared queue between multiple process in perlIPC between C application and PythonPassing Python object to another Python processHow to create an ipc communication win-form within a project

.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;

0

I have a Perl program that forks subprocesses and processes N items in them, after that I need to return these processed items to main process.

From multiple available IPC options to return processed items to main process, IPC::ShareLite seems to be a simplest one, but I'm not sure if it supports storing multiple items in one shared object.

Here is a snippet from the program, but it doesn't work:

use IPC::ShareLite;

# create shared object in main process
my $share = new IPC::ShareLite(
 -key => 1234,
 -create => 'yes',
 -destroy => 'yes'
) or die $!;

# fork subprocesses, process and store N items in shared object
$share->store($member);

# After subprocesses finish, fetch items in main process
my $members_size = scalar @$members_ref;
@$members_ref = ();
while ($members_size > 0) 
 my $member = $share->fetch();
 push @$members_ref, $member;
 $members_size--;

Above code fails with quite obscure error on my $member = $share->fetch();:

IPC::ShareLite fetch() error: Invalid argument at ...

Is it possible to use IPC::ShareLite object as I intend or it can hold only one item?

perl fork ipc

share|improve this question

asked Mar 26 at 5:56

Igor DvorzhakIgor Dvorzhak

1,77611 gold badge1111 silver badges2121 bronze badges

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  That code you posted doesn't run, much less demonstrate the problem. Please fix your question.
  
  – ikegami
  Mar 26 at 6:27
  
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

0

I have a Perl program that forks subprocesses and processes N items in them, after that I need to return these processed items to main process.

From multiple available IPC options to return processed items to main process, IPC::ShareLite seems to be a simplest one, but I'm not sure if it supports storing multiple items in one shared object.

Here is a snippet from the program, but it doesn't work:

use IPC::ShareLite;

# create shared object in main process
my $share = new IPC::ShareLite(
 -key => 1234,
 -create => 'yes',
 -destroy => 'yes'
) or die $!;

# fork subprocesses, process and store N items in shared object
$share->store($member);

# After subprocesses finish, fetch items in main process
my $members_size = scalar @$members_ref;
@$members_ref = ();
while ($members_size > 0) 
 my $member = $share->fetch();
 push @$members_ref, $member;
 $members_size--;

Above code fails with quite obscure error on my $member = $share->fetch();:

IPC::ShareLite fetch() error: Invalid argument at ...

Is it possible to use IPC::ShareLite object as I intend or it can hold only one item?

perl fork ipc

share|improve this question

asked Mar 26 at 5:56

Igor DvorzhakIgor Dvorzhak

1,77611 gold badge1111 silver badges2121 bronze badges

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  That code you posted doesn't run, much less demonstrate the problem. Please fix your question.
  
  – ikegami
  Mar 26 at 6:27
  
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

I have a Perl program that forks subprocesses and processes N items in them, after that I need to return these processed items to main process.

From multiple available IPC options to return processed items to main process, IPC::ShareLite seems to be a simplest one, but I'm not sure if it supports storing multiple items in one shared object.

Here is a snippet from the program, but it doesn't work:

use IPC::ShareLite;

# create shared object in main process
my $share = new IPC::ShareLite(
 -key => 1234,
 -create => 'yes',
 -destroy => 'yes'
) or die $!;

# fork subprocesses, process and store N items in shared object
$share->store($member);

# After subprocesses finish, fetch items in main process
my $members_size = scalar @$members_ref;
@$members_ref = ();
while ($members_size > 0) 
 my $member = $share->fetch();
 push @$members_ref, $member;
 $members_size--;

Above code fails with quite obscure error on my $member = $share->fetch();:

IPC::ShareLite fetch() error: Invalid argument at ...

Is it possible to use IPC::ShareLite object as I intend or it can hold only one item?

perl fork ipc

share|improve this question

asked Mar 26 at 5:56

Igor DvorzhakIgor Dvorzhak

1,77611 gold badge1111 silver badges2121 bronze badges

use IPC::ShareLite;

# create shared object in main process
my $share = new IPC::ShareLite(
 -key => 1234,
 -create => 'yes',
 -destroy => 'yes'
) or die $!;

# fork subprocesses, process and store N items in shared object
$share->store($member);

# After subprocesses finish, fetch items in main process
my $members_size = scalar @$members_ref;
@$members_ref = ();
while ($members_size > 0) 
 my $member = $share->fetch();
 push @$members_ref, $member;
 $members_size--;

share|improve this question

asked Mar 26 at 5:56

Igor DvorzhakIgor Dvorzhak

1,77611 gold badge1111 silver badges2121 bronze badges

share|improve this question

asked Mar 26 at 5:56

Igor DvorzhakIgor Dvorzhak

1,77611 gold badge1111 silver badges2121 bronze badges

asked Mar 26 at 5:56

Igor DvorzhakIgor Dvorzhak

1,77611 gold badge1111 silver badges2121 bronze badges

asked Mar 26 at 5:56

Igor DvorzhakIgor Dvorzhak

1,77611 gold badge1111 silver badges2121 bronze badges

1 Answer
1

active

oldest

votes

2

You are creating a child using fork, and this child gets a copy of the $share object. When the child exits, the child's copy of the $share object is destroyed, which causes the underlying system resources to be destroyed because you used -destroy => 'yes'.

In general, you want to create objects with destructors after performing the forks.

But when creating a IPC::ShareLite object, you normally want to leave key to let the system choose the key for you, but you need to do that before creating the forks.

Workaround

Perform the following in the child:

$share->destroy(0);

A better solution

Since the a normal usage mode for the module involves creating an object inherited by child processes, the module should handle that situation.

To that end, you should have the module's maintainer change the module so that the destruction only occurs if the current PID is the same as the PID in which $share was created.

sub _initialize 
 ...
 $self->pid = $$; # ADD
 ...


sub DESTROY 
 my $self = shift;

 #destroy_share( $self->share, $self->destroy ) # REMOVE
 destroy_share( $self->share, $self->pid == $$ ? $self->destroy : 0 ) # ADD
 if $self->share;

share|improve this answer

edited Mar 26 at 7:04

answered Mar 26 at 6:37

ikegamiikegami

275k1111 gold badges194194 silver badges415415 bronze badges

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Thank you, it works with the workaround.
  
  – Igor Dvorzhak
  Mar 26 at 16:34
  

  
  
  
  

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
);



);

draft saved

draft discarded

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

Name

Email

Required, but never shown

StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f55350668%2fstore-multiple-items-in-ipcsharelite-object%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest

Name

Email

Required, but never shown

2

You are creating a child using fork, and this child gets a copy of the $share object. When the child exits, the child's copy of the $share object is destroyed, which causes the underlying system resources to be destroyed because you used -destroy => 'yes'.

In general, you want to create objects with destructors after performing the forks.

But when creating a IPC::ShareLite object, you normally want to leave key to let the system choose the key for you, but you need to do that before creating the forks.

Workaround

Perform the following in the child:

$share->destroy(0);

A better solution

Since the a normal usage mode for the module involves creating an object inherited by child processes, the module should handle that situation.

To that end, you should have the module's maintainer change the module so that the destruction only occurs if the current PID is the same as the PID in which $share was created.

sub _initialize 
 ...
 $self->pid = $$; # ADD
 ...


sub DESTROY 
 my $self = shift;

 #destroy_share( $self->share, $self->destroy ) # REMOVE
 destroy_share( $self->share, $self->pid == $$ ? $self->destroy : 0 ) # ADD
 if $self->share;

share|improve this answer

edited Mar 26 at 7:04

answered Mar 26 at 6:37

ikegamiikegami

275k1111 gold badges194194 silver badges415415 bronze badges

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Thank you, it works with the workaround.
  
  – Igor Dvorzhak
  Mar 26 at 16:34
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

2

You are creating a child using fork, and this child gets a copy of the $share object. When the child exits, the child's copy of the $share object is destroyed, which causes the underlying system resources to be destroyed because you used -destroy => 'yes'.

In general, you want to create objects with destructors after performing the forks.

But when creating a IPC::ShareLite object, you normally want to leave key to let the system choose the key for you, but you need to do that before creating the forks.

Workaround

Perform the following in the child:

$share->destroy(0);

A better solution

Since the a normal usage mode for the module involves creating an object inherited by child processes, the module should handle that situation.

To that end, you should have the module's maintainer change the module so that the destruction only occurs if the current PID is the same as the PID in which $share was created.

sub _initialize 
 ...
 $self->pid = $$; # ADD
 ...


sub DESTROY 
 my $self = shift;

 #destroy_share( $self->share, $self->destroy ) # REMOVE
 destroy_share( $self->share, $self->pid == $$ ? $self->destroy : 0 ) # ADD
 if $self->share;

share|improve this answer

edited Mar 26 at 7:04

answered Mar 26 at 6:37

ikegamiikegami

275k1111 gold badges194194 silver badges415415 bronze badges

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Thank you, it works with the workaround.
  
  – Igor Dvorzhak
  Mar 26 at 16:34
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

You are creating a child using fork, and this child gets a copy of the $share object. When the child exits, the child's copy of the $share object is destroyed, which causes the underlying system resources to be destroyed because you used -destroy => 'yes'.

In general, you want to create objects with destructors after performing the forks.

But when creating a IPC::ShareLite object, you normally want to leave key to let the system choose the key for you, but you need to do that before creating the forks.

Workaround

Perform the following in the child:

$share->destroy(0);

A better solution

Since the a normal usage mode for the module involves creating an object inherited by child processes, the module should handle that situation.

To that end, you should have the module's maintainer change the module so that the destruction only occurs if the current PID is the same as the PID in which $share was created.

sub _initialize 
 ...
 $self->pid = $$; # ADD
 ...


sub DESTROY 
 my $self = shift;

 #destroy_share( $self->share, $self->destroy ) # REMOVE
 destroy_share( $self->share, $self->pid == $$ ? $self->destroy : 0 ) # ADD
 if $self->share;

share|improve this answer

edited Mar 26 at 7:04

answered Mar 26 at 6:37

ikegamiikegami

275k1111 gold badges194194 silver badges415415 bronze badges

$share->destroy(0);

sub _initialize 
 ...
 $self->pid = $$; # ADD
 ...


sub DESTROY 
 my $self = shift;

 #destroy_share( $self->share, $self->destroy ) # REMOVE
 destroy_share( $self->share, $self->pid == $$ ? $self->destroy : 0 ) # ADD
 if $self->share;

share|improve this answer

edited Mar 26 at 7:04

answered Mar 26 at 6:37

ikegamiikegami

275k1111 gold badges194194 silver badges415415 bronze badges

answered Mar 26 at 6:37

ikegamiikegami

275k1111 gold badges194194 silver badges415415 bronze badges

answered Mar 26 at 6:37

ikegamiikegami

275k1111 gold badges194194 silver badges415415 bronze badges