Develop Reference

Processing large JSON with multiple root elements and read into pandas dataframe

I want to (pre)process large JSON files (5-10GB each), which contain multiple root elements. These root elements follow each other without separator like this: {}{}....
So I first wrote the following simple code to get a valid JSON File:
with open(file) as f:
file_data = f.read()
file_data = file_data.replace("}{", "},{")
file_data = "[" + file_data + "]"
df = pd.read_json(file_data)
Obviously this doesn´t work with large files. Even the 400MB file doesn´t work. (I´ve got 16GB memory)
I´ve read that it´s possible to work with chunks but I don´t manage to get this in ''chunk logic''
Is there a way to ''chunkenize'' this?
I am glad for you help.

I am having a hard time visualizing the multiple root element idea, but you should write the file_data contents to disk and try reading it in separately. If you have the file open it will consume RAM in addition to having the RAM consumed by the file_data object (and possibly even the modified object, though that's a garbage collector question. I think garbage collection gets done after the function returns.) Try using f.close explicitly instead of the with and return that from a separate function.

Python hangs silently on large file write

I am trying to write a big list of numpy nd_arrays to disk.
The list is ~50000 elements long
Each element is a nd_array of size (~2048,2) of ints. The arrays have different shapes.
The method I am (curently) using is
#staticmethod
def _write_with_yaml(path, obj):
with io.open(path, 'w+', encoding='utf8') as outfile:
yaml.dump(obj, outfile, default_flow_style=False, allow_unicode=True)
I have also tried pickle which also give the same problem:
On small lists (~3400 long), this works fine, finishes fast enough (<30 sec).
On ~6000 long lists, this finishes after ~2 minutes.
When the list gets larger, the process seems not to do anything. No change in RAM or disk activity.
I stopped waiting after 30 minutes.
After force stopping the process, the file suddenly became of significant size (~600MB).
I can't know if it finished writing or not.
What is the correct way to write such large lists, know if he write succeeded, and, if possible, knowing when the write/read is going to finish?
How can I debug what's happening when the process seems to hang?
I prefer not to break and assemble the lists manually in my code, I expect the serialization libraries to be able to do that for me.

For the code
import numpy as np
import yaml
x = []
for i in range(0,50000):
x.append(np.random.rand(2048,2))
print("Arrays generated")
with open("t.yaml", 'w+', encoding='utf8') as outfile:
yaml.dump(x, outfile, default_flow_style=False, allow_unicode=True)
on my system (MacOSX, i7, 16 GiB RAM, SSD) with Python 3.7 and PyYAML 3.13 the finish time is 61min. During the save the python process occupied around 5 GBytes of memory and final file size is 2 GBytes. This also shows the overhead of the file format: as the size of the data is 50k * 2048 * 2 * 8 (the size of a float is generally 64 bits in python) = 1562 MBytes, means yaml is around 1.3 times worse (and serialisation/deserialisation is also taking time).
To answer your questions:
There is no correct or incorrect way. To have a progress update and
estimation of finishing time is not easy (ex: other tasks might
interfere with the estimation, resources like memory could be used
up, etc.). You can rely on a library that supports that or implement
something yourself (as the other answer suggested)
Not sure "debug" is the correct term, as in practice it might be that the process just slow. Doing a performance analysis is not easy, especially if
using multiple/different libraries. What I would start with is clear
requirements: what do you want from the file saved? Do they need to
be yaml? Saving 50k arrays as yaml does not seem the best solution
if you care about performance. Should you ask yourself first "which is the best format for what I want?" (but you did not give details so can't say...)
Edit: if you want something just fast, use pickle. The code:
import numpy as np
import yaml
import pickle
x = []
for i in range(0,50000):
x.append(np.random.rand(2048,2))
print("Arrays generated")
pickle.dump( x, open( "t.yaml", "wb" ) )
finishes in 9 seconds, and generates a file of 1.5GBytes (no overhead). Of course pickle format should be used in very different circumstances than yaml...

I cant say this is the answer, but it may be it.
When I was working on app that required fast cycles, I found out that something in the code is very slow. It was opening / closing yaml files.
It was solved by using JSON.
Dont use YAML for anything else than as some kind of config you dont open often.
Solution to your array saving:
np.save(path,array) # path = path+name+'.npy'
If you really need to save a list of arrays, I recommend you to save list with array paths(array themselfs you will save on disk with np.save). Saving python objects on disk is not really what you want. What you want is to save numpy arrays with np.save
Complete solution(Saving example):
for array_index in range(len(list_of_arrays)):
np.save(array_index+'.npy',list_of_arrays[array_index])
# path = array_index+'.npy'
Complete solution(Loading example):
list_of_array_paths = ['1.npy','2.npy']
list_of_arrays = []
for array_path in list_of_array_paths:
list_of_arrays.append(np.load(array_path))
Further advice:
Python cant really handle large arrays. Moreover if you have loaded several of them in the list. From the point of speed and memory, always work with one,two arrays at a time. The rest must be waiting on the disk. So instead of object reference, have reference as a path and when needed, load it from disk.
Also, you said you dont want to assemble the list manually.
Possible solution, which I dont advice, but is possibly exactly what you are looking for
>>> a = np.zeros(shape = [10,5,3])
>>> b = np.zeros(shape = [7,7,9])
>>> c = [a,b]
>>> np.save('data.npy',c)
>>> d = np.load('data.npy')
>>> d.shape
(2,)
>>> type(d)
<type 'numpy.ndarray'>
>>> d.shape
(2,)
>>> d[0].shape
(10, 5, 3)
>>>
I believe I dont need to comment above mentioned code. However, after loading back, you will lose list as the list will be transformed into numpy array.

MPI in Python: load data from a file by line concurrently

I'm new to python as well as MPI.
I have a huge data file, 10Gb, and I want to load it into, i.e., a list or whatever more efficient, please suggest.
Here is the way I load the file content into a list
def load(source, size):
data = [[] for _ in range(size)]
ln = 0
with open(source, 'r') as input:
for line in input:
ln += 1
data[ln%size].sanitize(line)
return data
Note:
source: is file name
size: is the number of concurrent process, I divide data into [size] of sublist.
for parallel computing using MPI in python.
Please advise how to load data more efficient and faster. I'm searching for days but I couldn't get any results matches my purpose and if there exists, please comment with a link here.
Regards

If I have understood the question, your bottleneck is not Python data structures. It is the I/O speed that limits the efficiency of your program.
If the file is written in continues blocks in the H.D.D then I don't know a way to read it faster than reading the file starting form the first bytes to the end.
But if the file is fragmented, create multiple threads each reading a part of the file. The must slow down the process of reading but modern HDDs implement a technique named NCQ (Native Command Queueing). It works by giving high priority to the read operation on sectors with addresses near the current position of the HDD head. Hence improving the overall speed of read operation using multiple threads.
To mention an efficient data structure in Python for your program, you need to mention what operations will you perform to the data? (delete, add, insert, search, append and so on) and how often?
By the way, if you use commodity hardware, 10GBs of RAM is expensive. Try reducing the need for this amount of RAM by loading the necessary data for computation then replacing the results with new data for the next operation. You can overlap the computation with the I/O operations to improve performance.

(original) Solution using pickling
The strategy for your task can go this way:
split the large file to smaller ones, make sure they are divided on line boundaries
have Python code, which can convert smaller files into resulting list of records and save them as
pickled file
run the python code for all the smaller files in parallel (using Python or other means)
run integrating code, taking pickled files one by one, loading the list from it and appending it
to final result.
To gain anything, you have to be careful as overhead can overcome all possible gains from parallel
runs:
as Python uses Global Interpreter Lock (GIL), do not use threads for parallel processing, use
processes. As processes cannot simply pass data around, you have to pickle them and let the other
(final integrating) part to read the result from it.
try to minimize number of loops. For this reason it is better to:
do not split the large file to too many smaller parts. To use power of your cores, best fit
the number of parts to number of cores (or possibly twice as much, but getting higher will
spend too much time on swithing between processes).
pickling allows saving particular items, but better create list of items (records) and pickle
the list as one item. Pickling one list of 1000 items will be faster than 1000 times pickling
small items one by one.
some tasks (spliting the file, calling the conversion task in parallel) can be often done faster
by existing tools in the system. If you have this option, use that.
In my small test, I have created a file with 100 thousands lines with content "98-BBBBBBBBBBBBBB",
"99-BBBBBBBBBBB" etc. and tested converting it to list of numbers [...., 98, 99, ...].
For spliting I used Linux command split, asking to create 4 parts preserving line borders:
$ split -n l/4 long.txt
This created smaller files xaa, xab, xac, xad.
To convert each smaller file I used following script, converting the content into file with
extension .pickle and containing pickled list.
# chunk2pickle.py
import pickle
import sys
def process_line(line):
return int(line.split("-", 1)[0])
def main(fname, pick_fname):
with open(pick_fname, "wb") as fo:
with open(fname) as f:
pickle.dump([process_line(line) for line in f], fo)
if __name__ == "__main__":
fname = sys.argv[1]
pick_fname = fname + ".pickled"
main(fname, pick_fname)
To convert one chunk of lines into pickled list of records:
$ python chunk2pickle xaa
and it creates the file xaa.pickled.
But as we need to do this in parallel, I used parallel tool (which has to be installed into
system):
$ parallel -j 4 python chunk2pickle.py {} ::: xaa xab xac xad
and I found new files with extension .pickled on the disk.
-j 4 asks to run 4 processes in parallel, adjust it to your system or leave it out and it will
default to number of cores you have.
parallel can also get list of parameters (input file names in our case) by other means like ls
command:
$ ls x?? |parallel -j 4 python chunk2pickle.py {}
To integrate the results, use script integrate.py:
# integrate.py
import pickle
def main(file_names):
res = []
for fname in file_names:
with open(fname, "rb") as f:
res.extend(pickle.load(f))
return res
if __name__ == "__main__":
file_names = ["xaa.pickled", "xab.pickled", "xac.pickled", "xad.pickled"]
# here you have the list of records you asked for
records = main(file_names)
print records
In my answer I have used couple of external tools (split and parallel). You may do similar task
with Python too. My answer is focusing only on providing you an option to keep Python code for
converting lines to required data structures. Complete pure Python answer is not covered here (it
would get much longer and probably slower.
Solution using process Pool (no explicit pickling needed)
Following solution uses multiprocessing from Python. In this case there is no need to pickle results
explicitly (I am not sure, if it is done by the library automatically, or it is not necessary and
data are passed using other means).
# direct_integrate.py
from multiprocessing import Pool
def process_line(line):
return int(line.split("-", 1)[0])
def process_chunkfile(fname):
with open(fname) as f:
return [process_line(line) for line in f]
def main(file_names, cores=4):
p = Pool(cores)
return p.map(process_chunkfile, file_names)
if __name__ == "__main__":
file_names = ["xaa", "xab", "xac", "xad"]
# here you have the list of records you asked for
# warning: records are in groups.
record_groups = main(file_names)
for rec_group in record_groups:
print(rec_group)
This updated solution still assumes, the large file is available in form of four smaller files.

get specific content from file python

I have a file test.txt which has an array:
array = [3,5,6,7,9,6,4,3,2,1,3,4,5,6,7,8,5,3,3,44,5,6,6,7]
Now what I want to do is get the content of array and perform some calculations with the array. But the problem is when I do open("test.txt") it outputs the content as the string. Actually the array is very big, and if I do a loop it might not be efficient. Is there any way to get the content without splitting , ? Any new ideas?

I recommend that you save the file as json instead, and read it in with the json module. Either that, or make it a .py file, and import it as python. A .txt file that looks like a python assignment is kind of odd.

Does your text file need to look like python syntax? A list of comma separated values would be the usual way to provide data:
1,2,3,4,5
Then you could read/write with the csv module or the numpy functions mentioned above. There's a lot of documentation about how to read csv data in efficiently. Once you had your csv reader data object set up, data could be stored with something like:
data = [ map( float, row) for row in csvreader]

If you want to store a python-like expression in a file, store only the expression (i.e. without array =) and parse it using ast.literal_eval().
However, consider using a different format such as JSON. Depending on the calculations you might also want to consider using a format where you do not need to load all data into memory at once.

Must the array be saved as a string? Could you use a pickle file and save it as a Python list?
If not, could you try lazy evaluation? Maybe only process sections of the array as needed.
Possibly, if there are calculations on the entire array that you must always do, it might be a good idea to pre-compute those results and store them in the txt file either in addition to the list or instead of the list.

You could also use numpy to load the data from the file using numpy.genfromtxt or numpy.loadtxt. Both are pretty fast and both have the ability to do the recasting on load. If the array is already loaded though, you can use numpy to convert it to an array of floats, and that is really fast.
import numpy as np
a = np.array(["1", "2", "3", "4"])
a = a.astype(np.float)

You could write a parser. They are very straightforward. And much much faster than regular expressions, please don't do that. Not that anyone suggested it.
# open up the file (r = read-only, b = binary)
stream = open("file_full_of_numbers.txt", "rb")
prefix = '' # end of the last chunk
full_number_list = []
# get a chunk of the file at a time
while True:
# just a small 1k chunk
buffer = stream.read(1024)
# no more data is left in the file
if '' == buffer:
break
# delemit this chunk of data by a comma
split_result = buffer.split(",")
# append the end of the last chunk to the first number
split_result[0] = prefix + split_result[0]
# save the end of the buffer (a partial number perhaps) for the next loop
prefix = split_result[-1]
# only work with full results, so skip the last one
numbers = split_result[0:-1]
# do something with the numbers we got (like save it into a full list)
full_number_list += numbers
# now full_number_list contains all the numbers in text format
You'll also have to add some logic to use the prefix when the buffer is blank. But I'll leave that code up to you.

OK, so the following methods ARE dangerous. Since they are used to attack systems by injecting code into them, used them at your own risk.
array = eval(open("test.txt", 'r').read().strip('array = '))
execfile('test.txt') # this is the fastest but most dangerous.
Safer methods.
import ast
array = ast.literal_eval(open("test.txt", 'r').read().strip('array = ')).
...
array = [float(value) for value in open('test.txt', 'r').read().strip('array = [').strip('\n]').split(',')]
The eassiest way to serialize python objects so you can load them later is to use pickle. Assuming you dont want a human readable format since this adds major head, either-wise, csv is fast and json is flexible.
import pickle
import random
array = random.sample(range(10**3), 20)
pickle.dump(array, open('test.obj', 'wb'))
loaded_array = pickle.load(open('test.obj', 'rb'))
assert array == loaded_array
pickle does have some overhead and if you need to serialize large objects you can specify the compression ratio, the default is 0 no compression, you can set it to pickle.HIGHEST_PROTOCOL pickle.dump(array, open('test.obj', 'wb'), pickle.HIGHEST_PROTOCOL)
If you are working with large numerical or scientific data sets then use numpy.tofile/numpy.fromfile or scipy.io.savemat/scipy.io.loadmat they have little overhead, but again only if you are already using numpy/scipy.
good luck.

Is there a memory efficient and fast way to load big JSON files?

I have some json files with 500MB.
If I use the "trivial" json.load() to load its content all at once, it will consume a lot of memory.
Is there a way to read partially the file? If it was a text, line delimited file, I would be able to iterate over the lines. I am looking for analogy to it.

There was a duplicate to this question that had a better answer. See https://stackoverflow.com/a/10382359/1623645, which suggests ijson.
Update:
I tried it out, and ijson is to JSON what SAX is to XML. For instance, you can do this:
import ijson
for prefix, the_type, value in ijson.parse(open(json_file_name)):
print prefix, the_type, value
where prefix is a dot-separated index in the JSON tree (what happens if your key names have dots in them? I guess that would be bad for Javascript, too...), theType describes a SAX-like event, one of 'null', 'boolean', 'number', 'string', 'map_key', 'start_map', 'end_map', 'start_array', 'end_array', and value is the value of the object or None if the_type is an event like starting/ending a map/array.
The project has some docstrings, but not enough global documentation. I had to dig into ijson/common.py to find what I was looking for.

So the problem is not that each file is too big, but that there are too many of them, and they seem to be adding up in memory. Python's garbage collector should be fine, unless you are keeping around references you don't need. It's hard to tell exactly what's happening without any further information, but some things you can try:
Modularize your code. Do something like:
for json_file in list_of_files:
process_file(json_file)
If you write process_file() in such a way that it doesn't rely on any global state, and doesn't
change any global state, the garbage collector should be able to do its job.
Deal with each file in a separate process. Instead of parsing all the JSON files at once, write a
program that parses just one, and pass each one in from a shell script, or from another python
process that calls your script via subprocess.Popen. This is a little less elegant, but if
nothing else works, it will ensure that you're not holding on to stale data from one file to the
next.
Hope this helps.

Yes.
You can use jsonstreamer SAX-like push parser that I have written which will allow you to parse arbitrary sized chunks, you can get it here and checkout the README for examples. Its fast because it uses the 'C' yajl library.

It can be done by using ijson. The working of ijson has been very well explained by Jim Pivarski in the answer above. The code below will read a file and print each json from the list. For example, file content is as below
[{"name": "rantidine", "drug": {"type": "tablet", "content_type": "solid"}},
{"name": "nicip", "drug": {"type": "capsule", "content_type": "solid"}}]
You can print every element of the array using the below method
def extract_json(filename):
with open(filename, 'rb') as input_file:
jsonobj = ijson.items(input_file, 'item')
jsons = (o for o in jsonobj)
for j in jsons:
print(j)
Note: 'item' is the default prefix given by ijson.
if you want to access only specific json's based on a condition you can do it in following way.
def extract_tabtype(filename):
with open(filename, 'rb') as input_file:
objects = ijson.items(input_file, 'item.drugs')
tabtype = (o for o in objects if o['type'] == 'tablet')
for prop in tabtype:
print(prop)
This will print only those json whose type is tablet.

On your mention of running out of memory I must question if you're actually managing memory. Are you using the "del" keyword to remove your old object before trying to read a new one? Python should never silently retain something in memory if you remove it.

Update
See the other answers for advice.
Original answer from 2010, now outdated
Short answer: no.
Properly dividing a json file would take intimate knowledge of the json object graph to get right.
However, if you have this knowledge, then you could implement a file-like object that wraps the json file and spits out proper chunks.
For instance, if you know that your json file is a single array of objects, you could create a generator that wraps the json file and returns chunks of the array.
You would have to do some string content parsing to get the chunking of the json file right.
I don't know what generates your json content. If possible, I would consider generating a number of managable files, instead of one huge file.

Another idea is to try load it into a document-store database like MongoDB.
It deals with large blobs of JSON well. Although you might run into the same problem loading the JSON - avoid the problem by loading the files one at a time.
If path works for you, then you can interact with the JSON data via their client and potentially not have to hold the entire blob in memory
http://www.mongodb.org/

"the garbage collector should free the memory"
Correct.
Since it doesn't, something else is wrong. Generally, the problem with infinite memory growth is global variables.
Remove all global variables.
Make all module-level code into smaller functions.

in addition to #codeape
I would try writing a custom json parser to help you figure out the structure of the JSON blob you are dealing with. Print out the key names only, etc. Make a hierarchical tree and decide (yourself) how you can chunk it. This way you can do what #codeape suggests - break the file up into smaller chunks, etc

You can parse the JSON file to CSV file and you can parse it line by line:
import ijson
import csv
def convert_json(self, file_path):
did_write_headers = False
headers = []
row = []
iterable_json = ijson.parse(open(file_path, 'r'))
with open(file_path + '.csv', 'w') as csv_file:
csv_writer = csv.writer(csv_file, ',', '"', csv.QUOTE_MINIMAL)
for prefix, event, value in iterable_json:
if event == 'end_map':
if not did_write_headers:
csv_writer.writerow(headers)
did_write_headers = True
csv_writer.writerow(row)
row = []
if event == 'map_key' and not did_write_headers:
headers.append(value)
if event == 'string':
row.append(value)

So simply using json.load() will take a lot of time. Instead, you can load the json data line by line using key and value pair into a dictionary and append that dictionary to the final dictionary and convert it to pandas DataFrame which will help you in further analysis
def get_data():
with open('Your_json_file_name', 'r') as f:
for line in f:
yield line
data = get_data()
data_dict = {}
each = {}
for line in data:
each = {}
# k and v are the key and value pair
for k, v in json.loads(line).items():
#print(f'{k}: {v}')
each[f'{k}'] = f'{v}'
data_dict[i] = each
Data = pd.DataFrame(data_dict)
#Data will give you the dictionary data in dataFrame (table format) but it will
#be in transposed form , so will then finally transpose the dataframe as ->
Data_1 = Data.T