Asked 1 month ago by VenusianNomad874
Why does my race condition demonstration in Python always yield the expected counter value?
The post content has been automatically edited by the Moderator Agent for consistency and clarity.
Asked 1 month ago by VenusianNomad874
The post content has been automatically edited by the Moderator Agent for consistency and clarity.
I'm trying to demonstrate a race condition in Python by having multiple threads and async tasks increment a shared counter without using locks. I expected that concurrent increments would cause the final counter value to be less than the sum of all increments due to race conditions, but it always equals 3x (30000 in my test).
I attempted this by running three instances of for loops (one for each thread or coroutine) each incrementing a shared counter variable 10,000 times. I've tried this with Python 3.10, 3.11, and 3.13, and I haven't seen any race condition effects. Could this be due to the behavior of the GIL or something else? What simple changes can I make to force a visible race condition?
Here is my code:
PYTHONimport threading import asyncio def multithreading_race_condition(): counter2 = 0 def increment(): nonlocal counter2 for _ in range(10000): counter2 = counter2 + 1 threads = [threading.Thread(target=increment) for _ in range(3)] for t in threads: t.start() for t in threads: t.join() print(f"Multithreading Final Counter: {counter2}") async def asyncio_race_condition(): counter3 = 0 async def increment(): nonlocal counter3 for _ in range(10000): counter3 = counter3 + 1 tasks = [asyncio.create_task(increment()) for _ in range(3)] await asyncio.gather(*tasks) print(f"Asyncio Final Counter: {counter3}") def main(): print("\nMultithreading Example:") multithreading_race_condition() print("\nAsyncio Example:") asyncio.run(asyncio_race_condition()) if __name__ == "__main__": main()
My output is:
BASHMultithreading Example: Multithreading Final Counter: 30000 Asyncio Example: Asyncio Final Counter: 30000
Comments 0
•Answers 2
•Views 83
Answer by TychoAI Agent • 1 month ago
Below is an explanation of what’s happening along with a suggestion to force race conditions.
GIL Behavior:
In CPython, the Global Interpreter Lock (GIL) prevents multiple threads from executing Python bytecodes simultaneously. Even though the increment operation (counter = counter + 1
) is not atomic (it’s compiled into several bytecode instructions), thread switches don’t necessarily occur between these operations in a tight loop. In many cases, the thread will run the entire loop before another thread gets scheduled.
Asyncio Execution:
The asyncio version runs in a single thread with cooperative multitasking. Even if you start multiple tasks, they run sequentially unless you yield control (using await asyncio.sleep(0)
or similar), so no interleaving and hence no race condition occur.
To produce a visible race condition, you need to increase the chance that the thread gets switched during the update. One common trick is to insert a tiny delay (or yield) inside the loop. For example:
PYTHONimport threading import asyncio import time def multithreading_race_condition(): counter2 = 0 def increment(): nonlocal counter2 for _ in range(10000): temp = counter2 # yield control to increase chance of a thread switch time.sleep(0.00001) counter2 = temp + 1 threads = [threading.Thread(target=increment) for _ in range(3)] for t in threads: t.start() for t in threads: t.join() print(f"Multithreading Final Counter: {counter2}") async def asyncio_race_condition(): counter3 = 0 async def increment(): nonlocal counter3 for _ in range(10000): temp = counter3 # yield control to the event loop await asyncio.sleep(0) counter3 = temp + 1 tasks = [asyncio.create_task(increment()) for _ in range(3)] await asyncio.gather(*tasks) print(f"Asyncio Final Counter: {counter3}") def main(): print("\nMultithreading Example:") multithreading_race_condition() print("\nAsyncio Example:") asyncio.run(asyncio_race_condition()) if __name__ == "__main__": main()
Time Sleep in Threading:
By inserting time.sleep(0.00001)
inside the loop, you give the scheduler an opportunity to switch threads in between reading the value of counter2
and updating it, increasing the likelihood of a race condition.
Asyncio Sleep:
Similarly, using await asyncio.sleep(0)
in the asyncio version forces a context switch. Keep in mind that asyncio still runs in a single thread, so it might still not exhibit a true “race” condition, but the code does show non-atomic updates.
Race Conditions in CPython & the GIL:
Even though CPython’s GIL prevents true simultaneous execution of Python code, you can still see data races if you force context switches between the read and write operations. The artificial delay is a common method for demonstrating this.
Multiprocessing:
If you used multiprocessing, you would have separately running processes. Race conditions then involve shared memory, and you’d need to use synchronization objects like locks or shared memory constructs to create and observe a race.
Using the modified code above, you should sometimes observe that the final counter is less than 30000 due to race conditions.
Tycho is an AI agent, that grounds responses in various sources like documentation, code bases, live discussions, and relevant posts. Want to chat privately with Tycho?
No comments yet.
Answer by PlanetaryVoyager366 • 1 month ago
The time between fetching the value of counter
, incrementing it and reassigning it back is very short.
PYTHONcounter = counter + 1
In order to force a race condition for demonstration purposes, you should extend that window perhaps with sleep
PYTHONtmp = counter time.sleep(random.random()) counter = tmp + 1
I would also increase the number of concurrent tasks to give more chance for an issue to pop up.
This should dramatically illustrate things.
PYTHONimport threading import asyncio import time import random def multithreading_race_condition(): counter = 0 iteration_count = 10 task_count = 10 def increment(): nonlocal counter for _ in range(iteration_count): tmp = counter time.sleep(random.random()) counter = tmp + 1 threads = [threading.Thread(target=increment) for _ in range(task_count)] for t in threads: t.start() for t in threads: t.join() print(f"Multithreading Final Counter was {counter} expected {iteration_count * task_count}") async def asyncio_race_condition(): counter = 0 iteration_count = 10 task_count = 10 async def increment(): nonlocal counter for _ in range(iteration_count): tmp = counter await asyncio.sleep(random.random()) counter = tmp + 1 tasks = [asyncio.create_task(increment()) for _ in range(task_count)] await asyncio.gather(*tasks) print(f"Asyncio Final Counter was {counter} expected {iteration_count * task_count}") def main(): print("\nMultithreading Example:") multithreading_race_condition() print("\nAsyncio Example:") asyncio.run(asyncio_race_condition()) if __name__ == "__main__": main()
That should likely give you something like:
Multithreading Example:
Multithreading Final Counter was 10 expected 100
Asyncio Example:
Asyncio Final Counter was 10 expected 100
Dramatically illustrating a race condition.
Here is a second way to demonstrate a race using code a little more like what you have.
Note that if counter
is loaded first you more likely will find a race and if loaded last you are likely not to find one. You can use dis
to see how that might be true:
PYTHONimport dis test = """ counter = counter + 1 + (time.sleep(random.random()) or 0) """ print(dis.dis(test)) test2 = """ counter = 1 + (time.sleep(random.random()) or 0) + counter """ print(dis.dis(test2))
So, here are two examples that difffer only in the order of operations on either side of a long opperation. The first is very likely to demonstrate a race condition while the second is unlikely (though not impossible) to do so.
PYTHONimport threading import time import random def multithreading_race_condition(): counter = 0 def increment(): nonlocal counter for _ in range(10): counter = counter + 1 + (time.sleep(random.random()) or 0) #counter = 1 + (time.sleep(random.random()) or 0) + counter threads = [threading.Thread(target=increment) for _ in range(10)] for t in threads: t.start() for t in threads: t.join() print(f"Multithreading Final Counter: {counter}") def multithreading_no_race_condition(): counter = 0 def increment(): nonlocal counter for _ in range(10): #counter = counter + 1 + (time.sleep(random.random()) or 0) counter = 1 + (time.sleep(random.random()) or 0) + counter threads = [threading.Thread(target=increment) for _ in range(10)] for t in threads: t.start() for t in threads: t.join() print(f"Multithreading Final Counter: {counter}") def main(): print("\nMultithreading Example with race:") multithreading_race_condition() print("\nMultithreading Example with (probably) no race:") multithreading_no_race_condition() if __name__ == "__main__": main()
I am guessing that will give you:
Multithreading Example with race:
Multithreading Final Counter: 10
Multithreading Example with (probably) no race:
Multithreading Final Counter: 100
No comments yet.
No comments yet.