I have a file open for writing, and a process running for days -- something is written into the file in relatively random moments. My understanding is -- until I do file.close() -- there is a chance nothing is really saved to disk. Is that true?
What if the system crashes when the main process is not finished yet? Is there a way to do kind of commit once every... say -- 10 minutes (and I call this commit myself -- no need to run timer)? Is file.close() and open(file,'a') the only way, or there are better alternatives?
You should be able to use file.flush() to do this.
If you don't want to kill the current process to add f.flush() (it sounds like it's been running for days already?), you should be OK. If you see the file you are writing to getting bigger, you will not lose that data...
From Python docs:
write(str)
Write a string to the file. There is no return value. Due to buffering,
the string may not actually show up in
the file until the flush() or close()
method is called.
It sounds like Python's buffering system will automatically flush file objects, but it is not guaranteed when that happens.
To make sure that you're data is written to disk, use file.flush() followed by os.fsync(file.fileno()).
As has already been stated use the .flush() method to force the write out of the buffer, but avoid using a lot of calls to flush as this can actually slow your writing down (if the application relies on fast writes) as you'll be forcing your filesystem to write changes that are smaller than it's buffer size which can bring you to your knees. :)
Related
In Python, if you either open a file without calling close(), or close the file but not using try-finally or the "with" statement, is this a problem? Or does it suffice as a coding practice to rely on the Python garbage-collection to close all files? For example, if one does this:
for line in open("filename"):
# ... do stuff ...
... is this a problem because the file can never be closed and an exception could occur that prevents it from being closed? Or will it definitely be closed at the conclusion of the for statement because the file goes out of scope?
In your example the file isn't guaranteed to be closed before the interpreter exits. In current versions of CPython the file will be closed at the end of the for loop because CPython uses reference counting as its primary garbage collection mechanism but that's an implementation detail, not a feature of the language. Other implementations of Python aren't guaranteed to work this way. For example IronPython, PyPy, and Jython don't use reference counting and therefore won't close the file at the end of the loop.
It's bad practice to rely on CPython's garbage collection implementation because it makes your code less portable. You might not have resource leaks if you use CPython, but if you ever switch to a Python implementation which doesn't use reference counting you'll need to go through all your code and make sure all your files are closed properly.
For your example use:
with open("filename") as f:
for line in f:
# ... do stuff ...
Some Pythons will close files automatically when they are no longer referenced, while others will not and it's up to the O/S to close files when the Python interpreter exits.
Even for the Pythons that will close files for you, the timing is not guaranteed: it could be immediately, or it could be seconds/minutes/hours/days later.
So, while you may not experience problems with the Python you are using, it is definitely not good practice to leave your files open. In fact, in cpython 3 you will now get warnings that the system had to close files for you if you didn't do it.
Moral: Clean up after yourself. :)
Although it is quite safe to use such construct in this particular case, there are some caveats for generalising such practice:
run can potentially run out of file descriptors, although unlikely, imagine hunting a bug like that
you may not be able to delete said file on some systems, e.g. win32
if you run anything other than CPython, you don't know when file is closed for you
if you open the file in write or read-write mode, you don't know when data is flushed
The file does get garbage collected, and hence closed. The GC determines when it gets closed, not you. Obviously, this is not a recommended practice because you might hit open file handle limit if you do not close files as soon as you finish using them. What if within that for loop of yours, you open more files and leave them lingering?
Hi It is very important to close your file descriptor in situation when you are going to use it's content in the same python script. I today itself realize after so long hecting debugging. The reason is content will be edited/removed/saved only after you close you file descriptor and changes are affected to file!
So suppose you have situation that you write content to a new file and then without closing fd you are using that file(not fd) in another shell command which reads its content. In this situation you will not get you contents for shell command as expected and if you try to debug you can't find the bug easily. you can also read more in my blog entry http://magnificentzps.blogspot.in/2014/04/importance-of-closing-file-descriptor.html
During the I/O process, data is buffered: this means that it is held in a temporary location before being written to the file.
Python doesn't flush the buffer—that is, write data to the file—until it's sure you're done writing. One way to do this is to close the file.
If you write to a file without closing, the data won't make it to the target file.
Python uses close() method to close the opened file. Once the file is closed, you cannot read/write data in that file again.
If you will try to access the same file again, it will raise ValueError since the file is already closed.
Python automatically closes the file, if the reference object has been assigned to some another file. Closing the file is a standard practice as it reduces the risk of being unwarrantedly modified.
One another way to solve this issue is.... with statement
If you open a file using with statement, a temporary variable gets reserved for use to access the file and it can only be accessed with the indented block. With statement itself calls the close() method after execution of indented code.
Syntax:
with open('file_name.text') as file:
#some code here
In Python, if you either open a file without calling close(), or close the file but not using try-finally or the "with" statement, is this a problem? Or does it suffice as a coding practice to rely on the Python garbage-collection to close all files? For example, if one does this:
for line in open("filename"):
# ... do stuff ...
... is this a problem because the file can never be closed and an exception could occur that prevents it from being closed? Or will it definitely be closed at the conclusion of the for statement because the file goes out of scope?
In your example the file isn't guaranteed to be closed before the interpreter exits. In current versions of CPython the file will be closed at the end of the for loop because CPython uses reference counting as its primary garbage collection mechanism but that's an implementation detail, not a feature of the language. Other implementations of Python aren't guaranteed to work this way. For example IronPython, PyPy, and Jython don't use reference counting and therefore won't close the file at the end of the loop.
It's bad practice to rely on CPython's garbage collection implementation because it makes your code less portable. You might not have resource leaks if you use CPython, but if you ever switch to a Python implementation which doesn't use reference counting you'll need to go through all your code and make sure all your files are closed properly.
For your example use:
with open("filename") as f:
for line in f:
# ... do stuff ...
Some Pythons will close files automatically when they are no longer referenced, while others will not and it's up to the O/S to close files when the Python interpreter exits.
Even for the Pythons that will close files for you, the timing is not guaranteed: it could be immediately, or it could be seconds/minutes/hours/days later.
So, while you may not experience problems with the Python you are using, it is definitely not good practice to leave your files open. In fact, in cpython 3 you will now get warnings that the system had to close files for you if you didn't do it.
Moral: Clean up after yourself. :)
Although it is quite safe to use such construct in this particular case, there are some caveats for generalising such practice:
run can potentially run out of file descriptors, although unlikely, imagine hunting a bug like that
you may not be able to delete said file on some systems, e.g. win32
if you run anything other than CPython, you don't know when file is closed for you
if you open the file in write or read-write mode, you don't know when data is flushed
The file does get garbage collected, and hence closed. The GC determines when it gets closed, not you. Obviously, this is not a recommended practice because you might hit open file handle limit if you do not close files as soon as you finish using them. What if within that for loop of yours, you open more files and leave them lingering?
Hi It is very important to close your file descriptor in situation when you are going to use it's content in the same python script. I today itself realize after so long hecting debugging. The reason is content will be edited/removed/saved only after you close you file descriptor and changes are affected to file!
So suppose you have situation that you write content to a new file and then without closing fd you are using that file(not fd) in another shell command which reads its content. In this situation you will not get you contents for shell command as expected and if you try to debug you can't find the bug easily. you can also read more in my blog entry http://magnificentzps.blogspot.in/2014/04/importance-of-closing-file-descriptor.html
During the I/O process, data is buffered: this means that it is held in a temporary location before being written to the file.
Python doesn't flush the buffer—that is, write data to the file—until it's sure you're done writing. One way to do this is to close the file.
If you write to a file without closing, the data won't make it to the target file.
Python uses close() method to close the opened file. Once the file is closed, you cannot read/write data in that file again.
If you will try to access the same file again, it will raise ValueError since the file is already closed.
Python automatically closes the file, if the reference object has been assigned to some another file. Closing the file is a standard practice as it reduces the risk of being unwarrantedly modified.
One another way to solve this issue is.... with statement
If you open a file using with statement, a temporary variable gets reserved for use to access the file and it can only be accessed with the indented block. With statement itself calls the close() method after execution of indented code.
Syntax:
with open('file_name.text') as file:
#some code here
This question already has answers here:
Is explicitly closing files important?
(7 answers)
Is close() necessary when using iterator on a Python file object [duplicate]
(8 answers)
Closed 8 years ago.
Usually when I open files I never call the close() method, and nothing bad happens. But I've been told this is bad practice. Why is that?
For the most part, not closing files is a bad idea, for the following reasons:
It puts your program in the garbage collectors hands - though the file in theory will be auto closed, it may not be closed. Python 3 and Cpython generally do a pretty good job at garbage collecting, but not always, and other variants generally suck at it.
It can slow down your program. Too many things open, and thus more used space in the RAM, will impact performance.
For the most part, many changes to files in python do not go into effect until after the file is closed, so if your script edits, leaves open, and reads a file, it won't see the edits.
You could, theoretically, run in to limits of how many files you can have open.
As #sai stated below, Windows treats open files as locked, so legit things like AV scanners or other python scripts can't read the file.
It is sloppy programming (then again, I'm not exactly the best at remembering to close files myself!)
Found some good answers:
(1) It is a matter of good programming practice. If you don't close
them yourself, Python will eventually close them for you. In some
versions of Python, that might be the instant they are no longer
being used; in others, it might not happen for a long time. Under
some circumstances, it might not happen at all.
(2) When writing to a file, the data may not be written to disk until
the file is closed. When you say "output.write(...)", the data is
often cached in memory and doesn't hit the hard drive until the file
is closed. The longer you keep the file open, the greater the
chance that you will lose data.
(3) Since your operating system has strict limits on how many file
handles can be kept open at any one instant, it is best to get into
the habit of closing them when they aren't needed and not wait for
"maid service" to clean up after you.
(4) Also, some operating systems (Windows, in particular) treat open
files as locked and private. While you have a file open, no other
program can also open it, even just to read the data. This spoils
backup programs, anti-virus scanners, etc.
http://python.6.x6.nabble.com/Tutor-Why-do-you-have-to-close-files-td4341928.html
https://docs.python.org/2/tutorial/inputoutput.html
Open files use resources and may be locked, preventing other programs from using them. Anyway, it is good practice to use with when reading files, as it takes care of closing the file for you.
with open('file', 'r') as f:
read_data = f.read()
Here's an example of something "bad" that might happen if you leave a file open.
Open a file for writing in your python interpreter, write a string to it, then open that file in a text editor. On my system, the file will be empty until I close the file handle.
The close() method of a file object flushes any unwritten information and closes the file object, after which no more writing can be done.
Python automatically closes a file when the reference object of a file is reassigned to another file. It is a good practice to use the close() method to close a file.Here is the link about the close() method. I hope this helps.
You only have to call close() when you're writing to a file.
Python automatically closes files most of the time, but sometimes it won't, so you want to call it manually just in case.
I had a problem with that recently:
I was writing some stuff to a file in a for-loop, but if I interrupt the script with ^C, a lot of data which should have actually been written to the file wasn't there. It looks like Python stops to writing there for no reason. I opened the file before the for loop. Then I changed the code so that Python opens and closes the file for ever single pass of the loop.
Basically, if you write stuff for your own and you don't have any issues - it's fine, if you write stuff for more people than just yourself - put a close() inside the code, because someone could randomly get an error message and you should try to prevent this.
I am writing a program in which I would like to be able to view a log file before the program is complete. I have noticed that, in python (2.7 and 3), that file.write() does not save the file, file.close() does. I don't want to create a million little log files with unique names but I would like to be able to view the updated log file before the program is finished. How can I do this?
Now, to be clear I am scripting using Ansys Workbench (trying to batch some CFX runs). Here's a link to a tutorial that shows what I'm talking about. They appear to have wrapped python, and by running the script I can send commands to the various modules. When the script is running there is no console onscreen and it appears to be eating all of the print statements, so the only way I can report what's happening is via a file. Also, I don't want to bring a console window up because eventually I will just run the program in batch mode (no interface). But the simulations take a long time to run and I can't wait for the program to finish before checking on what's happening.
You would need this:
file.flush()
# typically the above line would do. however this is used to ensure that the file is written
os.fsync(file.fileno())
Check this: http://docs.python.org/2/library/stdtypes.html#file.flush
file.flush()
Flush the internal buffer, like stdio‘s fflush(). This may be a no-op on some file-like objects.
Note flush() does not necessarily write the file’s data to disk. Use flush() followed by os.fsync() to ensure this behavior.
EDITED: See this question for detailed explanations: what exactly the python's file.flush() is doing?
Does file.flush() after each write help?
Hannu
This will write the file to disk immediately:
file.flush()
os.fsync(file.fileno())
According to the documentation https://docs.python.org/2/library/os.html#os.fsync
Force write of file with filedescriptor fd to disk. On Unix, this calls the native fsync() function; on Windows, the MS _commit() function.
If you’re starting with a Python file object f, first do f.flush(), and then do os.fsync(f.fileno()), to ensure that all internal buffers associated with f are written to disk.
I am trying to teach myself Python by reading documentation. I am trying to understand what it means to flush a file buffer. According to documentation, "file.flush" does the following.
Flush the internal buffer, like stdio‘s fflush().
This may be a no-op on some file-like objects.
I don't know what "internal buffer" and "no-op" mean, but I think it says that flush writes data from some buffer to a file.
Hence, I ran this file toggling the pound sign in the line in the middle.
with open("myFile.txt", "w+") as file:
file.write("foo")
file.write("bar")
# file.flush()
file.write("baz")
file.write("quux")
However, I seem to get the same myFile.txt with and without the call to file.flush(). What effect does file.flush() have?
Python buffers writes to files. That is, file.write returns before the data is actually written to your hard drive. The main motivation of this is that a few large writes are much faster than many tiny writes, so by saving up the output of file.write until a bit has accumulated, Python can maintain good writing speeds.
file.flush forces the data to be written out at that moment. This is hand when you know that it might be a while before you have more data to write out, but you want other processes to be able to view the data you've already written. Imagine a log file that grows slowly. You don't want to have to wait ages before enough entries have built up to cause the data to be written out in one big chunk.
In either case, file.close causes the remaining data to be flushed, so "quux" in your code will be written out as soon as file (which is a really bad name as it shadows the builtin file constructor) falls out of scope of the with context manager and gets closed.
Note: your OS does some buffering of its own, but I believe every OS where Python is implemented will honor file.flush's request to write data out to the drive. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.
By the way, "no-op" means "no operation", as in it won't actually do anything. For example, StringIO objects manipulate strings in memory, not files on your hard drive. StringIO.flush probably just immediately returns because there's not really anything for it to do.
Buffer content might be cached to improve performance. Flush makes sure that the content is written to disk completely, avoiding data loss. It is also useful when, for example, you want the line asking for user input printed completely on-screen before the next file operation takes place.