I have an issue. Here is example: https://play.golang.org/p/QSWY2INQuSE
func Avg(c chan string, wg *sync.WaitGroup) {
defer wg.Done()
c <- "test"
}
func main() {
var wg sync.WaitGroup
c := make(chan string)
timer1 := time.NewTicker(5 * time.Second)
for {
select {
case <-timer1.C:
wg.Add(1)
go Avg(c, &wg)
wg.Wait()
}
}
fmt.Println(<-c)
}
Why data does not reach fmt.Println(<-c)
Thank you!
Because you have an endless for, so the last fmt.Println() statement is never reached.
You have to break out of the loop if you want the last fmt.Println() statement to ever execute, for example:
loop:
for {
select {
case <-timer1.C:
wg.Add(1)
go Avg(c, &wg)
wg.Wait()
break loop
}
}
fmt.Println(<-c)
Note that you have to use a label, else the break would only break out of the select statement (and not from the for loop).
Also note that this alone won't work, as the channel is unbuffered, and thus Avg() will be blocked forever, trying to send a value on c while noone is ever trying to receive from it.
This simple example can be made working if you create the channel to be buffered:
c := make(chan string, 1) // Buffer for 1 value
Now it works and prints (try it on the Go Playground):
test
Related
I'm having trouble wrangling go routines and getting them to communicate back to a channel on the main go routine. To simplify, my code looks something like this:
func main() {
channel := make(chan string)
var wg sync.WaitGroup
for i := 0; i < 10; i++ {
wg.Add(1)
go performTest(channel, &wg, i)
}
wg.Wait()
close(channel)
for line := range channel {
fmt.Print(line)
}
}
func performTest(channel chan string, wg *sync.WaitGroup, i int) {
defer wg.Done()
// perform some work here
result := fmt.sprintf("Pretend result %d", i)
channel <- result
}
This seems to enter into some kind of a deadlock, but I don't understand why. It gets stuck on wg.Wait(), even though I would expect it to continue once all the goroutines have called Done on the wait group. What am I missing here? I'd like to wait for the goroutines, and then iterate over all results in the channel.
You can wait for the group and close the channel in a separate go routine. If the channel is closed, your range over the channel will end after the last sent value has been received.
If you just wait, nothing will receive from the channel. Since the channel is unbuffered, the performTest goroutines won't be able to send. For an unbuffered channel, the send operation will block until it has been received. Therefore, the deferred wg.Done call would never happen, and your program is deadlocked. Since Done is only called after the forever-blocking send has been performed.
func main() {
channel := make(chan string)
var wg sync.WaitGroup
for i := 0; i < 10; i++ {
wg.Add(1)
go performTest(channel, &wg, i)
}
// this is the trick
go func() {
wg.Wait()
close(channel)
}()
for line := range channel {
fmt.Print(line)
}
}
func performTest(channel chan string, wg *sync.WaitGroup, i int) {
defer wg.Done()
// perform some work here
result := fmt.Sprintf("Pretend result %d\n", i)
channel <- result
}
https://play.golang.com/p/5pACJzwL4Hi
I am trying to implement a simple logic where a Producer sends data to a channel ch with an forever for loop and a Consumer reads from the channel ch.
The Producer stops producing and exit the forever loop when it receives a signal on the channel quit.
The code is this (see also this playground)
func main() {
ch := make(chan int)
quit := make(chan bool)
var wg sync.WaitGroup
wg.Add(1)
go produce(ch, quit, &wg)
go consume(ch)
time.Sleep(1 * time.Millisecond)
fmt.Println("CLOSE")
close(quit)
wg.Wait()
}
func produce(ch chan int, quit chan bool, wg *sync.WaitGroup) {
for i := 0; ; i++ {
select {
case <-quit:
close(ch)
fmt.Println("exit")
wg.Done()
return //we exit
default:
ch <- i
fmt.Println("Producer sends", i)
}
}
}
func consume(ch chan int) {
for {
runtime.Gosched() // give the opportunity to the main goroutine to close the "quit" channel
select {
case i, more := <-ch:
if !more {
fmt.Println("exit consumer")
return
}
fmt.Println("Consumer receives", i)
}
}
}
If I run this piece of code on my machine (a Mac with 4 cores) everything works fine. If I try the same code on the Go Playgroud it always times out. I guess that this because the Go Playground is a single core and so the infinite loop does not give the chance to other goroutines to run, but then I do not understand why the instruction runtime.Gosched() does not have any effect.
Just to complete the picture I have seen that, if I set GOMAXPROCS=1 on my Mac, the program still works fine and exits as expected. If I set GOMAXPROCS=1 on my Mac and remove the runtime.Gosched() instruction, the behavior gets brittle: sometimes the program terminates as expected, some other times it seems to never exit the infinite loop.
You created a pathological situation that shouldn't happen in a real program, so the scheduler is not optimized to handle this. Combined with the fake time implementation in the playground, and you get far too many cycles of the producer and consumer before hitting a timeout.
The producer goroutine is creating values as fast as possible, while the consumer is always ready to receive them. With GOMAPXPROCS=1, the scheduler spends all its time bouncing between the two before it is forced to preempt the available work to check on the main goroutine, which takes longer than the playground will allow.
If we add something for the producer-consumer pair to do, we can limit the amount of time they have to monopolize the scheduler. For example, adding a time.Sleep(time.Microsecond) to the consumer will cause the playground to print 1000 values. This also goes to show how "accurate" the simulated time is in the playground, since that would not be possible with normal hardware which takes a non-zero amount time to process each message.
While an interesting case, this has little bearing on real programs.
A few notes, you can range over a channel to receive all values, you should always defer wg.Done at the start of the goroutine when possible, you can send values in the select case which allows you to actually cancel the for-select loop when the send isn't ready, and if you want the "exit consumer" message you need to send the WaitGroup to the consumer as well.
https://play.golang.org/p/WyPmpY9pFl7
func main() {
ch := make(chan int)
quit := make(chan bool)
var wg sync.WaitGroup
wg.Add(2)
go produce(ch, quit, &wg)
go consume(ch, &wg)
time.Sleep(50 * time.Microsecond)
fmt.Println("CLOSE")
close(quit)
wg.Wait()
}
func produce(ch chan int, quit chan bool, wg *sync.WaitGroup) {
defer wg.Done()
for i := 0; ; i++ {
select {
case <-quit:
close(ch)
fmt.Println("exit")
return
case ch <- i:
fmt.Println("Producer sends", i)
}
}
}
func consume(ch chan int, wg *sync.WaitGroup) {
defer wg.Done()
for i := range ch {
fmt.Println("Consumer receives", i)
time.Sleep(time.Microsecond)
}
fmt.Println("exit consumer")
return
}
go version go1.11.4 darwin/amd64
A new channel and goroutine were created, and the content of the old channel was transferred to the new channel through goroutine. It should not block, but after testing, it was found to be blocked.
thanks.
type waiter struct {
ch1 chan struct{}
ch2 <-chan time.Time
limit int
count int
}
func (w *waiter) recv1Block() chan struct{} {
ch := make(chan struct{})
go func() {
for m := range w.ch1 {
ch <- m
}
}()
return ch
}
func (w *waiter) runBlock(wg *sync.WaitGroup) {
defer wg.Done()
i := 0
for i < w.limit {
select {
case <-w.recv1Block(): **// why block here?**
i++
case <-w.recv2():
}
}
w.count = i
}
why recv1Block will be block.
Every time you call recv1Block(), it creates a new channel and launches a background goroutine that tries to read all of the data from it. Since you're calling it in a loop, you will have many things all trying to consume the data from the channel; since the channel never closes, all of the goroutines will run forever.
As an exercise, you might try changing your code to pass around a chan int instead of a chan struct{}, and write a series of sequential numbers, and print them out as they're ultimately received. A sequence like this is valid:
run on goroutine #1 calls recv1Block().
recv1Block() on GR#1 spawns GR#2, and returns channel#2.
run on GR#1 blocks receiving on channel#2.
recv1Block() on GR#2 reads 0 from w.c1.
recv1Block() on GR#2 writes 0 to channel#2 (where run on GR#1 is ready to read).
recv1Block() on GR#2 reads 1 from w.c1.
recv1Block() on GR#2 wants to write 0 to channel#2 but blocks.
run on GR#1 wakes up, and receives the 0.
run on GR#1 calls recv1Block().
recv1Block() on GR#1 spawns GR#3, and returns channel #3.
recv1Block() on GR#3 reads 2 from w.c1.
...
Notice that the value 1 in this sequence will never be written anywhere, and in fact there is nothing left that could read it.
The easy solution here is to not call the channel-creating function in a loop:
func (w *waiter) runBlock(wg *sync.WaitGroup) {
defer wg.Done()
ch1 := w.recv1Block()
ch2 := w.recv2()
for {
select {
case _, ok := <-ch1:
if !ok {
return
}
w.count++
case <-ch2:
}
}
It's also standard practice to close channels when you're done with them. This will terminate a for ... range ch loop, and it will appear as readable to a select statement. In your top-level generator function:
for i := 0; i < w.limit; i++ {
w.ch1 <- struct{}{}
}
close(w.ch1)
And in your "copy the channel" function:
func (w *waiter) recv1Block() chan struct{} {
ch := make(chan struct{})
go func() {
for m := range w.ch1 {
ch <- m
}
close(ch)
}()
return ch
}
This also means that you don't need to run the main loop by "dead reckoning", expecting it to produce exactly 100 items then stop; you can stop whenever its channel exits. The consumer loop I show above does this.
There's 2 ways to write the repro:
The 1st way, the program exits clean.
func recurse(depth int, wg *sync.WaitGroup) {
defer wg.Done()
if depth == 0 {
return
}
wg.Add(1)
go recurse(depth - 1, wg)
}
func main() {
wg := sync.WaitGroup{}
wg.Add(1)
go recurse(3, &wg)
wg.Wait()
}
The 2nd way, the program gives "fatal error: all goroutines are asleep - deadlock!"
func recurse(depth int, wg sync.WaitGroup) {
defer wg.Done()
if depth == 0 {
return
}
wg.Add(1)
go recurse(depth - 1, wg)
}
func main() {
var wg sync.WaitGroup
wg.Add(1)
go recurse(3, wg)
wg.Wait()
}
Would anyone kindly explain the intricate way in which the 2nd way differs from the 1st way so as to cause "Deadlock"?
WaitGroup under the hood is just a struct containing a counter guarded by mutex. Go provide arguments to functions copy_by_value way. So recurse( depth, wg) function receive only a copy of counter when passed by value. Like this:
counter := 5
func(counter){
counter--
fmt.Println(counter) //will print "4"
}(counter)
fmt.Println(counter) //will be "5" again
I have some issues with the following code:
package main
import (
"fmt"
"sync"
)
// This program should go to 11, but sometimes it only prints 1 to 10.
func main() {
ch := make(chan int)
var wg sync.WaitGroup
wg.Add(2)
go Print(ch, wg) //
go func(){
for i := 1; i <= 11; i++ {
ch <- i
}
close(ch)
defer wg.Done()
}()
wg.Wait() //deadlock here
}
// Print prints all numbers sent on the channel.
// The function returns when the channel is closed.
func Print(ch <-chan int, wg sync.WaitGroup) {
for n := range ch { // reads from channel until it's closed
fmt.Println(n)
}
defer wg.Done()
}
I get a deadlock at the specified place. I have tried setting wg.Add(1) instead of 2 and it solves my problem. My belief is that I'm not successfully sending the channel as an argument to the Printer function. Is there a way to do that? Otherwise, a solution to my problem is replacing the go Print(ch, wg)line with:
go func() {
Print(ch)
defer wg.Done()
}
and changing the Printer function to:
func Print(ch <-chan int) {
for n := range ch { // reads from channel until it's closed
fmt.Println(n)
}
}
What is the best solution?
Well, first your actual error is that you're giving the Print method a copy of the sync.WaitGroup, so it doesn't call the Done() method on the one you're Wait()ing on.
Try this instead:
package main
import (
"fmt"
"sync"
)
func main() {
ch := make(chan int)
var wg sync.WaitGroup
wg.Add(2)
go Print(ch, &wg)
go func() {
for i := 1; i <= 11; i++ {
ch <- i
}
close(ch)
defer wg.Done()
}()
wg.Wait() //deadlock here
}
func Print(ch <-chan int, wg *sync.WaitGroup) {
for n := range ch { // reads from channel until it's closed
fmt.Println(n)
}
defer wg.Done()
}
Now, changing your Print method to remove the WaitGroup of it is a generally good idea: the method doesn't need to know something is waiting for it to finish its job.
I agree with #Elwinar's solution, that the main problem in your code caused by passing a copy of your Waitgroup to the Print function.
This means the wg.Done() is operated on a copy of wg you defined in the main. Therefore, wg in the main could not get decreased, and thus a deadlock happens when you wg.Wait() in main.
Since you are also asking about the best practice, I could give you some suggestions of my own:
Don't remove defer wg.Done() in Print. Since your goroutine in main is a sender, and print is a receiver, removing wg.Done() in receiver routine will cause an unfinished receiver. This is because only your sender is synced with your main, so after your sender is done, your main is done, but it's possible that the receiver is still working. My point is: don't leave some dangling goroutines around after your main routine is finished. Close them or wait for them.
Remember to do panic recovery everywhere, especially anonymous goroutine. I have seen a lot of golang programmers forgetting to put panic recovery in goroutines, even if they remember to put recover in normal functions. It's critical when you want your code to behave correctly or at least gracefully when something unexpected happened.
Use defer before every critical calls, like sync related calls, at the beginning since you don't know where the code could break. Let's say you removed defer before wg.Done(), and a panic occurrs in your anonymous goroutine in your example. If you don't have panic recover, it will panic. But what happens if you have a panic recover? Everything's fine now? No. You will get deadlock at wg.Wait() since your wg.Done() gets skipped because of panic! However, by using defer, this wg.Done() will be executed at the end, even if panic happened. Also, defer before close is important too, since its result also affects the communication.
So here is the code modified according to the points I mentioned above:
package main
import (
"fmt"
"sync"
)
func main() {
ch := make(chan int)
var wg sync.WaitGroup
wg.Add(2)
go Print(ch, &wg)
go func() {
defer func() {
if r := recover(); r != nil {
println("panic:" + r.(string))
}
}()
defer func() {
wg.Done()
}()
for i := 1; i <= 11; i++ {
ch <- i
if i == 7 {
panic("ahaha")
}
}
println("sender done")
close(ch)
}()
wg.Wait()
}
func Print(ch <-chan int, wg *sync.WaitGroup) {
defer func() {
if r := recover(); r != nil {
println("panic:" + r.(string))
}
}()
defer wg.Done()
for n := range ch {
fmt.Println(n)
}
println("print done")
}
Hope it helps :)