Are Python extensions produced by Cython/Pyrex threadsafe?

Question

If not, is there a way I can guarantee thread safety by programming a certain way?

To clarify, when talking about "threadsafe,' I mean Python threads, not OS-level threads.

Answer 1

It all depends on the interaction between your Cython code and Python's GIL, as documented in detail here. If you don't do anything special, Cython-generated code will respect the GIL (as will a C-coded extension that doesn't use the GIL-releasing macros); that makes such code "as threadsafe as Python code" -- which isn't much, but is easier to handle than completely free-threading code (you still need to architect multi-threaded cooperation and synchronization, ideally with Queue instances but possibly with locking &c).

Code that has relinquished the GIL and not yet acquired it back MUST NOT in any way interact with the Python runtime and the objects that the Python runtime uses -- this goes for Cython just as well as for C-coded extensions. The upside of it is of course that such code can run on a separate core (until it needs to sync up or in any way communicate with the Python runtime again, of course).

Answer 2

Python's global interpreter lock means that only one thread can be active in the interpreter at any one time. However, once control is passed out to a C extension another thread can be active within the interpreter. Multiple threads can be created, and nothing prevents a thread from being interrupted within the middle of a critical section. N

on thread-safe code can be implemented within the interpreter, so nothing about code running within the interpreter is inherently thread safe. Code in C or Pyrex modules can still modify data structures that are visible to python code. Native code can, of course, also have threading issues with native data structures.

You can't guarantee thread safety beyond using appropriate design and synchronisation - the GIL on the python interpreter doesn't materially change this.