Disclaimer: I'm not a supervisor developer, just trying to do a review.

Looks good except the part where you use ctypes. Personally I would rather have supervisor try to import time.monotonic(), if available, or else fall back to using time.time() as usual:

import time
monotonic_time = getattr(time, "monotonic", time.time)

If this means that the monotonic issue is fixed only on Python 3, so be it. Python 3 has been widely available for many years, it's time to stop backporting every single feature to Python 2.

Hi! Thanks for looking; anything's better than radio silence for three months 😉

The reason I used ctypes was because (for whatever silly reason) supervisord's running on Python 2 on Linux in my deployment; I was simply scratching my own itch in this case. While in general I agree that Python 3 is the future, I still need to support existing software.

Having said that, getting even just the Python 3 part in (assuming somebody who can merge it in makes that call - it sounds like you aren't that person?) is better than nothing, since it would at least make patching in Python 2 support easier. But it feels like amending the PR at this point without knowing that would have a better chance of landing isn't productive right now.

Hi. I am in the same boat, have a patch that needs review, sitting there for some weeks. So I thought that the supervisor maintainers must need some help, so I am reviewing some patches to help the project.

Yes, I think if only the Python 3 patch is accepted, falling back to Python 2 time.time(), it keeps supervisord running as before on Python 2, but improves the behaviour if running on Python 3. Nonetheless, perhaps you can monkey-patch the time module somewhere: import time; time.monotonic = my_fancy_monotonic_function, before the supervisor process.py module gets imported.

@mook-as Thanks for your work on this. I know the original motivation for this was #281, which I have hopefully fixed in eb96a2a. It would be great if you were able to help test that the fix works.

I have been thinking about this PR, and I'm a bit nervous about the ctypes hacking that's needed to get this on Python 2. As far as I can tell, Python 2 is a very large majority of our users and probably will be for some time, and they are all going to hit this code path. It seems risky. I'd be a lot more comfortable if we were able to just defer to Python stdlib for this.

The suggestion from @gjcarneiro is only use monotonic time if it is available. How about something like this in compat.py:

try:
    from time import monotonic as maybe_monotonic_time
except ImportError:
    from time import time as maybe_monotonic_time

The maybe_monotonic_time name is ugly but it would make calling code clear that time might go backwards. On Python 2, #281 would be fixed by eb96a2a. On Python 3, monotonic would be used so eb96a2a would be a no-op. I'm not crazy about differing behavior across Python versions but it would add stability so it might be worth it.

@mook-as @gjcarneiro What do you think?

cc @msabramo @lukeweber You are guys are pretty active lately, what do you think about this PR?

Closing for now since the motivation for this was #281 which should be fixed by eb96a2a. We can reopen if discussion starts again.