Develop Reference

Reading specific chunks pandas / not reading all chunks in pandas

I am trying to use accordingly to this question and answer reading a large csv file by chunks and processing it. Since I'm not native with python I got an optimization problem and looking for a better solution here.
What my code does:
I read in the line count of my csv with
with open(file) as f:
row_count = sum(1 for line in f)
afterwards I "slice" my data in 30 equal sized chunks and process it accordingly to the linked answer with a for loop and pd.read_csv(file, chunksize). Since plotting 30 graphs in one is pretty unclear, I plot it every 5 steps with modulo (which may be variated). For this I use an external counter.
chunksize = row_count // 30
counter = 0
for chunk in pd.read_csv(file, chunksize=chunksize):
df = chunk
print(counter)
if ((counter % 5) == 0 | (counter == 0):
plt.plot(df["Variable"])
counter = counter +1
plt.show()
Now to my question:
It seems like, this loop reads the chunk size in before processing the loop, which is reasonable. I can see this, since the print(counter) steps are also fairly slow. Since I read a few million rows of a csv, it takes some time every step. Is there a way to skip the not wanted chunks in the for loop, before reading it in? I was trying out something like:
wanted_plts <- [1,5,10,15,20,25,30]
for i in wanted_plts:
for chunk[i] in pd.read_csv(file, chunksize=chunksize):
.
.
I think I have understanding issues how I can manipulate this syntax of the for loop range. There should be an elegant way to fix this.
Also: i found the .get_chunk(x) by pandas but this seems to create just one chunk of size x.
Another attempt by me is trying to subset the reader object of pd.read_csv like pd.read_csv()[0,1,2] but it seems that's not possible too.
Amendment: I'm aware plotting a lot of data in matplotlib is slow. I preprocess it earlier, but for making this code readable I removed all unnecessary parts.

You are wasting a lot of resources when parsing CSV into DataFrame without using it. To avoid this you can create line index during the first pass:
fp = open(file_name)
row_count = 0
pos = {0: 0}
line = fp.readline()
while line:
row_count += 1
pos[row_count] = fp.tell()
line = fp.readline()
Do not dispose the file handle yet! Because read_csv() accepts streams, you can move your file pointer as you want:
chunksize = row_count // 30
wanted_plts = [1,5,10,15,20,25,30]
for i in wanted_plts:
fp.seek(pos[i*chunksize]) # this will bring you to the first line of the desired chunk
obj = pd.read_csv(fp, chunksize=chunksize) # read your chunk lazily
df = obj.get_chunk() # convert to DataFrame object
plt.plot(df["Variable"]) # do something
fp.close() # Don't forget to close the file when finished.
And finally a warning: when reading CSV this way you will lose column names. So make an adjustment:
obj = pd.read_csv(fp, chunksize=chunksize, names=[!!<column names you have>!!])
P.S. file is a reserved word, avoid using it to prevent undesired side effects. You can use file_ or file_name instead.

I've toyed with your setup, trying to find a way to skip chunks, using another rendering library like pyqtgraph or using matplotlib.pyplot subroutines instead of plot(), all to no avail.
So the only fair advice I can give you is to limit the scope of read_csv to only the data you're interested in by passing the usecols parameter.
Instead of:
for chunk in pd.read_csv(file, chunksize=chunksize):
plt.plot(chunk['Variable'])
Use:
for chunk in pd.read_csv(file, usecols=['Variable'], chunksize=chunksize):
plt.plot(chunk)
And, if you haven't already, definitely limit the number of iterations by going for the biggest chunksize you possibly can (so in your case the lowest row_count divider).
I haven't quantified their respective weight but you will gain on both the csv_read() and the plot() method overheads, even ever so slightly due to the fact that your current chunks are already quite big.
With my test data, quadrupling the chunksize cuts down processing time in half:
chunksize=1000 => executed in 12.7s
chunksize=2000 => executed in 9.06s
chunksize=3000 => executed in 7.68s
chunksize=4000 => executed in 6.94s
And specifying usecols at read time also cuts down processing time in half again:
chunksize=1000 + usecols=['Variable'] => executed in 8.33s
chunksize=2000 + usecols=['Variable'] => executed in 5.27s
chunksize=3000 + usecols=['Variable'] => executed in 4.39s
chunksize=4000 + usecols=['Variable'] => executed in 3.54s

As far as I know, pandas does not provide any support for skipping chunks of file. At least I never found anything about it in the documentation.
In general, skipping lines from file (not reading them at all) is difficult unless you know in advance how many lines you want to skip and how many characters you have in each of those lines. In this case you can try to play with IO and seek to move the stream position to the exact place you need the next iteration.
But it does not seem your case.
I think the best thing you can do to improve efficiency is to read the lines using standard IO, and convert to a dataframe only the lines you need / want to plot.
Consider for example the following custom iterator.
When instantiated, it saves the header (first line). Each iteration it reads a chunk of lines from the file and then skip the following n*chunksize lines. It returns the header line followed by the read lines, wrapped in a io.StringIO object (so it's a stream and can be fed directly to pandas.read_csv).
import io
from itertools import islice
class DfReaderChunks:
def __init__(self, filename, chunksize, n):
self.fo = open(filename)
self.chs = chunksize
self.skiplines = self.chs * n
self.header = next(self.fo)
def getchunk(self):
ll = list(islice(self.fo, self.chs))
if len(ll) == 0:
raise StopIteration
dd = list(islice(self.fo, self.skiplines))
return self.header + ''.join(ll)
def __iter__(self):
return self
def __next__(self):
return io.StringIO(self.getchunk())
def close(self):
self.fo.close()
def __del__(self):
self.fo.close()
Using this class, your can read from your file:
reader = DfReaderChunks(file, chunksize, 4)
for dfst in reader:
df = pd.read_csv(dfst)
print(df) #here I print to stdout, you can plot
reader.close()
which is "equivalent" to your setup:
for chunk in pd.read_csv(file, chunksize=chunksize):
df = chunk
if (counter % 5 == 0):
print(df) #again I print, you can plot
counter += 1
I tested the time used by both the above snippets using a dataframe of 39 Mb (100000 rows or random numbers).
On my machine, the former takes 0.458 seconds, the latter 0.821 seconds.
The only drawback is that the former snippet loses track of the row index (it's a new dataframe each time, so index always start from 0) but the printed chunks are the same.

"pygame.error: Out of memory" when loading level with a large area [duplicate]

Is there a limit to memory for python? I've been using a python script to calculate the average values from a file which is a minimum of 150mb big.
Depending on the size of the file I sometimes encounter a MemoryError.
Can more memory be assigned to the python so I don't encounter the error?
EDIT: Code now below
NOTE: The file sizes can vary greatly (up to 20GB) the minimum size of the a file is 150mb
file_A1_B1 = open("A1_B1_100000.txt", "r")
file_A2_B2 = open("A2_B2_100000.txt", "r")
file_A1_B2 = open("A1_B2_100000.txt", "r")
file_A2_B1 = open("A2_B1_100000.txt", "r")
file_write = open ("average_generations.txt", "w")
mutation_average = open("mutation_average", "w")
files = [file_A2_B2,file_A2_B2,file_A1_B2,file_A2_B1]
for u in files:
line = u.readlines()
list_of_lines = []
for i in line:
values = i.split('\t')
list_of_lines.append(values)
count = 0
for j in list_of_lines:
count +=1
for k in range(0,count):
list_of_lines[k].remove('\n')
length = len(list_of_lines[0])
print_counter = 4
for o in range(0,length):
total = 0
for p in range(0,count):
number = float(list_of_lines[p][o])
total = total + number
average = total/count
print average
if print_counter == 4:
file_write.write(str(average)+'\n')
print_counter = 0
print_counter +=1
file_write.write('\n')

(This is my third answer because I misunderstood what your code was doing in my original, and then made a small but crucial mistake in my second—hopefully three's a charm.
Edits: Since this seems to be a popular answer, I've made a few modifications to improve its implementation over the years—most not too major. This is so if folks use it as template, it will provide an even better basis.
As others have pointed out, your MemoryError problem is most likely because you're attempting to read the entire contents of huge files into memory and then, on top of that, effectively doubling the amount of memory needed by creating a list of lists of the string values from each line.
Python's memory limits are determined by how much physical ram and virtual memory disk space your computer and operating system have available. Even if you don't use it all up and your program "works", using it may be impractical because it takes too long.
Anyway, the most obvious way to avoid that is to process each file a single line at a time, which means you have to do the processing incrementally.
To accomplish this, a list of running totals for each of the fields is kept. When that is finished, the average value of each field can be calculated by dividing the corresponding total value by the count of total lines read. Once that is done, these averages can be printed out and some written to one of the output files. I've also made a conscious effort to use very descriptive variable names to try to make it understandable.
try:
from itertools import izip_longest
except ImportError: # Python 3
from itertools import zip_longest as izip_longest
GROUP_SIZE = 4
input_file_names = ["A1_B1_100000.txt", "A2_B2_100000.txt", "A1_B2_100000.txt",
"A2_B1_100000.txt"]
file_write = open("average_generations.txt", 'w')
mutation_average = open("mutation_average", 'w') # left in, but nothing written
for file_name in input_file_names:
with open(file_name, 'r') as input_file:
print('processing file: {}'.format(file_name))
totals = []
for count, fields in enumerate((line.split('\t') for line in input_file), 1):
totals = [sum(values) for values in
izip_longest(totals, map(float, fields), fillvalue=0)]
averages = [total/count for total in totals]
for print_counter, average in enumerate(averages):
print(' {:9.4f}'.format(average))
if print_counter % GROUP_SIZE == 0:
file_write.write(str(average)+'\n')
file_write.write('\n')
file_write.close()
mutation_average.close()

You're reading the entire file into memory (line = u.readlines()) which will fail of course if the file is too large (and you say that some are up to 20 GB), so that's your problem right there.
Better iterate over each line:
for current_line in u:
do_something_with(current_line)
is the recommended approach.
Later in your script, you're doing some very strange things like first counting all the items in a list, then constructing a for loop over the range of that count. Why not iterate over the list directly? What is the purpose of your script? I have the impression that this could be done much easier.
This is one of the advantages of high-level languages like Python (as opposed to C where you do have to do these housekeeping tasks yourself): Allow Python to handle iteration for you, and only collect in memory what you actually need to have in memory at any given time.
Also, as it seems that you're processing TSV files (tabulator-separated values), you should take a look at the csv module which will handle all the splitting, removing of \ns etc. for you.

Python can use all memory available to its environment. My simple "memory test" crashes on ActiveState Python 2.6 after using about
1959167 [MiB]
On jython 2.5 it crashes earlier:
239000 [MiB]
probably I can configure Jython to use more memory (it uses limits from JVM)
Test app:
import sys
sl = []
i = 0
# some magic 1024 - overhead of string object
fill_size = 1024
if sys.version.startswith('2.7'):
fill_size = 1003
if sys.version.startswith('3'):
fill_size = 497
print(fill_size)
MiB = 0
while True:
s = str(i).zfill(fill_size)
sl.append(s)
if i == 0:
try:
sys.stderr.write('size of one string %d\n' % (sys.getsizeof(s)))
except AttributeError:
pass
i += 1
if i % 1024 == 0:
MiB += 1
if MiB % 25 == 0:
sys.stderr.write('%d [MiB]\n' % (MiB))
In your app you read whole file at once. For such big files you should read the line by line.

No, there's no Python-specific limit on the memory usage of a Python application. I regularly work with Python applications that may use several gigabytes of memory. Most likely, your script actually uses more memory than available on the machine you're running on.
In that case, the solution is to rewrite the script to be more memory efficient, or to add more physical memory if the script is already optimized to minimize memory usage.
Edit:
Your script reads the entire contents of your files into memory at once (line = u.readlines()). Since you're processing files up to 20 GB in size, you're going to get memory errors with that approach unless you have huge amounts of memory in your machine.
A better approach would be to read the files one line at a time:
for u in files:
for line in u: # This will iterate over each line in the file
# Read values from the line, do necessary calculations

Not only are you reading the whole of each file into memory, but also you laboriously replicate the information in a table called list_of_lines.
You have a secondary problem: your choices of variable names severely obfuscate what you are doing.
Here is your script rewritten with the readlines() caper removed and with meaningful names:
file_A1_B1 = open("A1_B1_100000.txt", "r")
file_A2_B2 = open("A2_B2_100000.txt", "r")
file_A1_B2 = open("A1_B2_100000.txt", "r")
file_A2_B1 = open("A2_B1_100000.txt", "r")
file_write = open ("average_generations.txt", "w")
mutation_average = open("mutation_average", "w") # not used
files = [file_A2_B2,file_A2_B2,file_A1_B2,file_A2_B1]
for afile in files:
table = []
for aline in afile:
values = aline.split('\t')
values.remove('\n') # why?
table.append(values)
row_count = len(table)
row0length = len(table[0])
print_counter = 4
for column_index in range(row0length):
column_total = 0
for row_index in range(row_count):
number = float(table[row_index][column_index])
column_total = column_total + number
column_average = column_total/row_count
print column_average
if print_counter == 4:
file_write.write(str(column_average)+'\n')
print_counter = 0
print_counter +=1
file_write.write('\n')
It rapidly becomes apparent that (1) you are calculating column averages (2) the obfuscation led some others to think you were calculating row averages.
As you are calculating column averages, no output is required until the end of each file, and the amount of extra memory actually required is proportional to the number of columns.
Here is a revised version of the outer loop code:
for afile in files:
for row_count, aline in enumerate(afile, start=1):
values = aline.split('\t')
values.remove('\n') # why?
fvalues = map(float, values)
if row_count == 1:
row0length = len(fvalues)
column_index_range = range(row0length)
column_totals = fvalues
else:
assert len(fvalues) == row0length
for column_index in column_index_range:
column_totals[column_index] += fvalues[column_index]
print_counter = 4
for column_index in column_index_range:
column_average = column_totals[column_index] / row_count
print column_average
if print_counter == 4:
file_write.write(str(column_average)+'\n')
print_counter = 0
print_counter +=1

R readBin vs. Python struct

I am attempting to read a binary file using Python. Someone else has read in the data with R using the following code:
x <- readBin(webpage, numeric(), n=6e8, size = 4, endian = "little")
myPoints <- data.frame("tmax" = x[1:(length(x)/4)],
"nmax" = x[(length(x)/4 + 1):(2*(length(x)/4))],
"tmin" = x[(2*length(x)/4 + 1):(3*(length(x)/4))],
"nmin" = x[(3*length(x)/4 + 1):(length(x))])
With Python, I am trying the following code:
import struct
with open('file','rb') as f:
val = f.read(16)
while val != '':
print(struct.unpack('4f', val))
val = f.read(16)
I am coming to slightly different results. For example, the first row in R returns 4 columns as -999.9, 0, -999.0, 0. Python returns -999.0 for all four columns (images below).
Python output:
R output:
I know that they are slicing by the length of the file with some of the [] code, but I do not know how exactly to do this in Python, nor do I understand quite why they do this. Basically, I want to recreate what R is doing in Python.
I can provide more of either code base if needed. I did not want to overwhelm with code that was not necessary.

Deducing from the R code, the binary file first contains a certain number tmax's, then the same number of nmax's, then tmin's and nmin's. What the code does is reading the entire file, which is then chopped up in the 4 parts (tmax's, nmax's, etc..) using slicing.
To do the same in python:
import struct
# Read entire file into memory first. This is done so we can count
# number of bytes before parsing the bytes. It is not a very memory
# efficient way, but it's the easiest. The R-code as posted wastes even
# more memory: it always takes 6e8 * 4 bytes (~ 2.2Gb) of memory no
# matter how small the file may be.
#
data = open('data.bin','rb').read()
# Calculate number of points in the file. This is
# file-size / 16, because there are 4 numeric()'s per
# point, and they are 4 bytes each.
#
num = int(len(data) / 16)
# Now we know how much there are, we take all tmax numbers first, then
# all nmax's, tmin's and lastly all nmin's.
# First generate a format string because it depends on the number points
# there are in the file. It will look like: "fffff"
#
format_string = 'f' * num
# Then, for cleaner code, calculate chunk size of the bytes we need to
# slice off each time.
#
n = num * 4 # 4-byte floats
# Note that python has different interpretation of slicing indices
# than R, so no "+1" is needed here as it is in the R code.
#
tmax = struct.unpack(format_string, data[:n])
nmax = struct.unpack(format_string, data[n:2*n])
tmin = struct.unpack(format_string, data[2*n:3*n])
nmin = struct.unpack(format_string, data[3*n:])
print("tmax", tmax)
print("nmax", nmax)
print("tmin", tmin)
print("nmin", nmin)
If the goal is to have this data structured as a list of points(?) like (tmax,nmax,tmin,nmin), then append this to the code:
print()
print("Points:")
# Combine ("zip") all 4 lists into a list of (tmax,nmax,tmin,nmin) points.
# Python has a function to do this at once: zip()
#
i = 0
for point in zip(tmax, nmax, tmin, nmin):
print(i, ":", point)
i += 1

Here's a less memory-hungry way to do the same. It possibly is a bit faster too. (but that is difficult to check for me)
My computer did not have sufficient memory to run the first program with those huge files. This one does, but I still needed to create a list of ony tmax's first (the first 1/4 of the file), then print it, and then delete the list in order to have enough memory for nmax's, tmin's and nmin's.
But this one too says the nmin's inside the 2018 file are all -999.0. If that doesn't make sense, could you check what the R-code makes of it then? I suspect that it is just what's in the file. The other possibility is of course, that I got it all wrong (which I doubt). However, I tried the 2017 file too, and that one does not have such problem: all of tmax, nmax, tmin, nmin have around 37% -999.0 's.
Anyway, here's the second code:
import os
import struct
# load_data()
# data_store : object to append() data items (floats) to
# num : number of floats to read and store
# datafile : opened binary file object to read float data from
#
def load_data(data_store, num, datafile):
for i in range(num):
data = datafile.read(4) # process one float (=4 bytes) at a time
item = struct.unpack("<f", data)[0] # '<' means little endian
data_store.append(item)
# save_list() saves a list of float's as strings to a file
#
def save_list(filename, datalist):
output = open(filename, "wt")
for item in datalist:
output.write(str(item) + '\n')
output.close()
#### MAIN ####
datafile = open('data.bin','rb')
# Get file size so we can calculate number of points without reading
# the (large) file entirely into memory.
#
file_info = os.stat(datafile.fileno())
# Calculate number of points, i.e. number of each tmax's, nmax's,
# tmin's, nmin's. A point is 4 floats of 4 bytes each, hence number
# of points = file-size / (4*4)
#
num = int(file_info.st_size / 16)
tmax_list = list()
load_data(tmax_list, num, datafile)
save_list("tmax.txt", tmax_list)
del tmax_list # huge list, save memory
nmax_list = list()
load_data(nmax_list, num, datafile)
save_list("nmax.txt", nmax_list)
del nmax_list # huge list, save memory
tmin_list = list()
load_data(tmin_list, num, datafile)
save_list("tmin.txt", tmin_list)
del tmin_list # huge list, save memory
nmin_list = list()
load_data(nmin_list, num, datafile)
save_list("nmin.txt", nmin_list)
del nmin_list # huge list, save memory

using python to search extremely large text file

I have a large 40 million line, 3 gigabyte text file (probably wont be able to fit in memory) in the following format:
399.4540176 {Some other data}
404.498759292 {Some other data}
408.362737492 {Some other data}
412.832976111 {Some other data}
415.70665675 {Some other data}
419.586515381 {Some other data}
427.316825959 {Some other data}
.......
Each line starts off with a number and is followed by some other data. The numbers are in sorted order. I need to be able to:
Given a number x and and a range y, find all the lines whose number is within y range of x. For example if x=20 and y=5, I need to find all lines whose number is between 15 and 25.
Store these lines into another separate file.
What would be an efficient method to do this without having to trawl through the entire file?

If you don't want to generate a database ahead of time for line lengths, you can try this:
import os
import sys
# Configuration, change these to suit your needs
maxRowOffset = 100 #increase this if some lines are being missed
fileName = 'longFile.txt'
x = 2000
y = 25
#seek to first character c before the current position
def seekTo(f,c):
while f.read(1) != c:
f.seek(-2,1)
def parseRow(row):
return (int(row.split(None,1)[0]),row)
minRow = x - y
maxRow = x + y
step = os.path.getsize(fileName)/2.
with open(fileName,'r') as f:
while True:
f.seek(int(step),1)
seekTo(f,'\n')
row = parseRow(f.readline())
if row[0] < minRow:
if minRow - row[0] < maxRowOffset:
with open('outputFile.txt','w') as fo:
for row in f:
row = parseRow(row)
if row[0] > maxRow:
sys.exit()
if row[0] >= minRow:
fo.write(row[1])
else:
step /= 2.
step = step * -1 if step < 0 else step
else:
step /= 2.
step = step * -1 if step > 0 else step
It starts by performing a binary search on the file until it is near (less than maxRowOffset) the row to find. Then it starts reading every line until it finds one that is greater than x-y. That line, and every line after it are written to an output file until a line is found that is greater than x+y, and which point the program exits.
I tested this on a 1,000,000 line file and it runs in 0.05 seconds. Compare this to reading every line which took 3.8 seconds.

You need random access to the lines which you won't get with a text files unless the lines are all padded to the same length.
One solution is to dump the table into a database (such as SQLite) with two columns, one for the number and one for all the other data (assuming that the data is guaranteed to fit into whatever the maximum number of characters allowed in a single column in your database is). Then index the number column and you're good to go.
Without a database, you could read through file one time and create an in-memory data structure with pairs of values showing containing (number, line-offset). You calculate the line-offset by adding the lengths of each row (including line end). Now you can binary search these value pairs on number and randomly access the lines in the file using the offset. If you need to repeat the search later, pickle the in-memory structure and reload for later re-use.
This reads the entire file (which you said you don't want to do), but does so only once to build the index. After that you can execute as many requests against the file as you want and they will be very fast.
Note that this second solution is essentially creating a database index on your text file.
Rough code to create the index in second solution:
import Pickle
line_end_length = len('\n') # must be a better way to do this!
offset = 0
index = [] # probably a better structure to use than a list
f = open(filename)
for row in f:
nbr = float(row.split(' ')[0])
index.append([nbr, offset])
offset += len(row) + line_end_length
Pickle.dump(index, open('filename.idx', 'wb')) # saves it for future use
Now, you can perform a binary search on the list. There's probably a much better data structure to use for accruing the index values than a list, but I'd have to read up on the various collection types.

Since you want to match the first field, you can use gawk:
$ gawk '{if ($1 >= 15 && $1 <= 25) { print }; if ($1 > 25) { exit }}' your_file
Edit: Taking a file with 261,775,557 lines that is 2.5 GiB big, searching for lines 50,010,015 to 50,010,025 this takes 27 seconds on my Intel(R) Core(TM) i7 CPU 860 # 2.80GHz. Sounds good enough for me.

In order to find the line that starts with the number just above your lower limit, you have to go through the file line by line until you find that line. No other way, i.e. all data in the file has to be read and parsed for newline characters.
We have to run this search up to the first line that exceeds your upper limit and stop. Hence, it helps that the file is already sorted. This code will hopefully help:
with open(outpath) as outfile:
with open(inpath) as infile:
for line in infile:
t = float(line.split()[0])
if lower_limit <= t <= upper_limit:
outfile.write(line)
elif t > upper_limit:
break
I think theoretically there is no other option.

What is the optimal way to process a very large (over 30GB) text file and also show progress

[newbie question]
Hi,
I'm working on a huge text file which is well over 30GB.
I have to do some processing on each line and then write it to a db in JSON format. When I read the file and loop using "for" my computer crashes and displays blue screen after about 10% of processing data.
Im currently using this:
f = open(file_path,'r')
for one_line in f.readlines():
do_some_processing(one_line)
f.close()
Also how can I show overall progress of how much data has been crunched so far ?
Thank you all very much.

File handles are iterable, and you should probably use a context manager. Try this:
with open(file_path, 'r') as fh:
for line in fh:
process(line)
That might be enough.

I use a function like this for a similiar problem. You can wrap up any iterable with it.
Change this
for one_line in f.readlines():
You just need to change your code to
# don't use readlines, it creates a big list of all data in memory rather than
# iterating one line at a time.
for one_line in in progress_meter(f, 10000):
You might want to pick a smaller or larger value depending on how much time you want to waste printing status messages.
def progress_meter(iterable, chunksize):
""" Prints progress through iterable at chunksize intervals."""
scan_start = time.time()
since_last = time.time()
for idx, val in enumerate(iterable):
if idx % chunksize == 0 and idx > 0:
print idx
print 'avg rate', idx / (time.time() - scan_start)
print 'inst rate', chunksize / (time.time() - since_last)
since_last = time.time()
print
yield val

Using readline imposes to find the end of each line in your file. If some lines are very long, it might lead your interpreter to crash (not enough memory to buffer the full line).
In order to show progress you can check the file size for example using:
import os
f = open(file_path, 'r')
fsize = os.fstat(f).st_size
The progress of your task can then be the number of bytes processed divided by the file size times 100 to have a percentage.