Watching something be written to a file live with tailRedirect output of remote python app started through ssh to fileUbuntu RFID Screensaver lock-unlockHow can I offer an XP-compatible migration to Linux Mint?Is there a command in Linux which waits till it will be terminated?Ctrl+c in a sub process is killing a nohup'ed process earlier in the scripthow to get cronjob running every minuteCtrl-C'd an in-place recursive gzip - is this likely to have broken anything?Getting output of another script while preserving line-breakssocat and rich terminal again“Ctrl + c” combination works different on different SSH clients
Did converts (ger tzedek) in ancient Israel own land?
What is the intuition behind short exact sequences of groups; in particular, what is the intuition behind group extensions?
Why does Kotter return in Welcome Back Kotter
Stopping power of mountain vs road bike
Do I have a twin with permutated remainders?
Is there a hemisphere-neutral way of specifying a season?
Etiquette around loan refinance - decision is going to cost first broker a lot of money
Emailing HOD to enhance faculty application
What is the word for reserving something for yourself before others do?
In a Spin are Both Wings Stalled?
What is the PIE reconstruction for word-initial alpha with rough breathing?
Facing a paradox: Earnshaw's theorem in one dimension
SSH "lag" in LAN on some machines, mixed distros
Arrow those variables!
Why is the 'in' operator throwing an error with a string literal instead of logging false?
Does casting Light, or a similar spell, have any effect when the caster is swallowed by a monster?
Brothers & sisters
Is it inappropriate for a student to attend their mentor's dissertation defense?
How badly should I try to prevent a user from XSSing themselves?
How do I write bicross product symbols in latex?
What is going on with Captain Marvel's blood colour?
Took a trip to a parallel universe, need help deciphering
A reference to a well-known characterization of scattered compact spaces
Will google still index a page if I use a $_SESSION variable?
Watching something be written to a file live with tail
Redirect output of remote python app started through ssh to fileUbuntu RFID Screensaver lock-unlockHow can I offer an XP-compatible migration to Linux Mint?Is there a command in Linux which waits till it will be terminated?Ctrl+c in a sub process is killing a nohup'ed process earlier in the scripthow to get cronjob running every minuteCtrl-C'd an in-place recursive gzip - is this likely to have broken anything?Getting output of another script while preserving line-breakssocat and rich terminal again“Ctrl + c” combination works different on different SSH clients
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty height:90px;width:728px;box-sizing:border-box;
I have a python program which is, slowly, generating some output.
I want to capture that in a file, but I also thought I could watch it live with tail.
So in one terminal I'm doing :
python myprog.py > output.txt
and in another terminal :
tail -f output.txt
But it seems like the tail isn't showing me anything while the python program is running.
If I hit ctrl-c to kill the python script, suddenly the tail of output.txt
starts filling up. But not while python is running.
What am I doing wrong?
linux command-line redirection stdout
add a comment |
I have a python program which is, slowly, generating some output.
I want to capture that in a file, but I also thought I could watch it live with tail.
So in one terminal I'm doing :
python myprog.py > output.txt
and in another terminal :
tail -f output.txt
But it seems like the tail isn't showing me anything while the python program is running.
If I hit ctrl-c to kill the python script, suddenly the tail of output.txt
starts filling up. But not while python is running.
What am I doing wrong?
linux command-line redirection stdout
9
How aboutpython myprog.py | tee output.txt
instead?
– n8te
yesterday
3
@n8te tee might show the same problem if the program isn't flushing the output buffer regularly. This needs flush() and tee.
– JPhi1618
22 hours ago
1
stdbuf
can be used to alter the buffering status of file descriptors.
– studog
6 hours ago
Terminology: There is no pipe anywhere in this scenario. There's a redirect to a regular file. (Which causes C stdio and Python to decide to make stdout full-buffered instead of line-buffered because it's not a TTY). Pipes are a different type of file (a buffer inside the kernel). I edited your question to correct that.
– Peter Cordes
5 hours ago
Probably not needed in your situation but if you don't want to terminate the program you can use gdb and call fflush: see stackoverflow.com/questions/8251269/…
– Mark Wagner
5 hours ago
add a comment |
I have a python program which is, slowly, generating some output.
I want to capture that in a file, but I also thought I could watch it live with tail.
So in one terminal I'm doing :
python myprog.py > output.txt
and in another terminal :
tail -f output.txt
But it seems like the tail isn't showing me anything while the python program is running.
If I hit ctrl-c to kill the python script, suddenly the tail of output.txt
starts filling up. But not while python is running.
What am I doing wrong?
linux command-line redirection stdout
I have a python program which is, slowly, generating some output.
I want to capture that in a file, but I also thought I could watch it live with tail.
So in one terminal I'm doing :
python myprog.py > output.txt
and in another terminal :
tail -f output.txt
But it seems like the tail isn't showing me anything while the python program is running.
If I hit ctrl-c to kill the python script, suddenly the tail of output.txt
starts filling up. But not while python is running.
What am I doing wrong?
linux command-line redirection stdout
linux command-line redirection stdout
edited 5 hours ago
Peter Cordes
2,4751621
2,4751621
asked yesterday
interstarinterstar
415413
415413
9
How aboutpython myprog.py | tee output.txt
instead?
– n8te
yesterday
3
@n8te tee might show the same problem if the program isn't flushing the output buffer regularly. This needs flush() and tee.
– JPhi1618
22 hours ago
1
stdbuf
can be used to alter the buffering status of file descriptors.
– studog
6 hours ago
Terminology: There is no pipe anywhere in this scenario. There's a redirect to a regular file. (Which causes C stdio and Python to decide to make stdout full-buffered instead of line-buffered because it's not a TTY). Pipes are a different type of file (a buffer inside the kernel). I edited your question to correct that.
– Peter Cordes
5 hours ago
Probably not needed in your situation but if you don't want to terminate the program you can use gdb and call fflush: see stackoverflow.com/questions/8251269/…
– Mark Wagner
5 hours ago
add a comment |
9
How aboutpython myprog.py | tee output.txt
instead?
– n8te
yesterday
3
@n8te tee might show the same problem if the program isn't flushing the output buffer regularly. This needs flush() and tee.
– JPhi1618
22 hours ago
1
stdbuf
can be used to alter the buffering status of file descriptors.
– studog
6 hours ago
Terminology: There is no pipe anywhere in this scenario. There's a redirect to a regular file. (Which causes C stdio and Python to decide to make stdout full-buffered instead of line-buffered because it's not a TTY). Pipes are a different type of file (a buffer inside the kernel). I edited your question to correct that.
– Peter Cordes
5 hours ago
Probably not needed in your situation but if you don't want to terminate the program you can use gdb and call fflush: see stackoverflow.com/questions/8251269/…
– Mark Wagner
5 hours ago
9
9
How about
python myprog.py | tee output.txt
instead?– n8te
yesterday
How about
python myprog.py | tee output.txt
instead?– n8te
yesterday
3
3
@n8te tee might show the same problem if the program isn't flushing the output buffer regularly. This needs flush() and tee.
– JPhi1618
22 hours ago
@n8te tee might show the same problem if the program isn't flushing the output buffer regularly. This needs flush() and tee.
– JPhi1618
22 hours ago
1
1
stdbuf
can be used to alter the buffering status of file descriptors.– studog
6 hours ago
stdbuf
can be used to alter the buffering status of file descriptors.– studog
6 hours ago
Terminology: There is no pipe anywhere in this scenario. There's a redirect to a regular file. (Which causes C stdio and Python to decide to make stdout full-buffered instead of line-buffered because it's not a TTY). Pipes are a different type of file (a buffer inside the kernel). I edited your question to correct that.
– Peter Cordes
5 hours ago
Terminology: There is no pipe anywhere in this scenario. There's a redirect to a regular file. (Which causes C stdio and Python to decide to make stdout full-buffered instead of line-buffered because it's not a TTY). Pipes are a different type of file (a buffer inside the kernel). I edited your question to correct that.
– Peter Cordes
5 hours ago
Probably not needed in your situation but if you don't want to terminate the program you can use gdb and call fflush: see stackoverflow.com/questions/8251269/…
– Mark Wagner
5 hours ago
Probably not needed in your situation but if you don't want to terminate the program you can use gdb and call fflush: see stackoverflow.com/questions/8251269/…
– Mark Wagner
5 hours ago
add a comment |
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
You may also need to explicitly flush the buffer for it to get piped upon generation. This is because output is typically only printed when the pipe's buffer fills up (which is in kilobytes I belive), and when the stdin message ends. This is probably to save on read/writes. You could do this after every print, or if you are looping, after the last print within the loop.
import sys
...
print('Some message')
sys.stdout.flush()
New contributor
4
If you have read this far, please don't be thinking of closing and re-opening the file to do this, the seeks will be a problem, especially for very large files. (I've seen this done!).
– mckenzm
21 hours ago
2
You can also useprint
'sflush
parameter to do just as well. For example,print('some message', flush=True)
.
– Dan
12 hours ago
4
It has nothing to do with the pipe's buffer, but with thestdout
mechanism which doesn't flush after newline if it doesn't write to a tty.
– glglgl
11 hours ago
add a comment |
Instead of trying to tail a live file, use tee
instead. It was made to do exactly what you're trying to do.
From man tee:
tee(1) - Linux man page
Name tee - read from standard input and write to standard output and files
Synopsis
tee [OPTION]... [FILE]...
Description
Copy standard input to each FILE, and also to standard output.
-a, --append
append to the given FILEs, do not overwrite
-i, --ignore-interrupts
ignore interrupt signals
--help
display this help and exit
--version
output version information and exit
If a FILE is -, copy again to standard output.
So in your case you'd run:
python myprog.py | tee output.txt
EDIT: As others have pointed out, this answer will run into the same issue OP was originally having unless sys.stdout.flush()
is used in the python program as described in Davey's accepted answer. The testing I did before posting this answer did not accurately reflect OP's use-case.
tee
can still be used as an alternative--albeit less than optimal--method of displaying the output while also writing to the file, but Davey's answer is clearly the correct and best answer.
tail in another thread is a good solution for when you've started the application before you decide you want to see the output though.
– Baldrickk
17 hours ago
7
That requires a permanent console session, this is why it’s often much easier to usetail -F
or even better the follow function ofless
. But in all cases theflush
should be used.
– eckes
15 hours ago
3
This won't solve the problem that the OP is having. Python's output to the pipe will be buffered just like output to the file.
– Barmar
7 hours ago
add a comment |
Run python with the unbuffered flag:
python -u myprog.py > output.txt
Output will then print in real time.
New contributor
add a comment |
Terminology: There is no pipe anywhere in this scenario. (I edited the question to fix that). Pipes are a different type of file (a buffer inside the kernel).
This is a redirect to a regular file.
C stdio, and Python, default to making stdout line-buffered when it's connected to a TTY, otherwise it's full-buffered. Line-buffered means the buffer is flushed after a newline. Full-buffered means it's only flushed to become visible to the OS (i.e. with a write()
system call) when it's full.
You will see output eventually, in chunks of maybe 4kiB at a time. (I don't know the default buffer size.) This is generally more efficient, and means fewer writes to your actual disk. But not great for interactive monitoring, because output is hidden inside the memory of the writing process until it's flushed.
On Stack Overflow, there's a Disable output buffering Python Q&A which lists many ways to get unbuffered (or line-buffered?) output to stdout in Python. The question itself summarizes the answers.
Options include running python -u
(Or I guess putting #!/usr/bin/python -u
at the top of your script), or using the PYTHONUNBUFFERED
environment variable for that program. Or explicit flushing after some/all print
functions, like @Davey's answer suggests.
Some other programs have similar options, e.g. GNU grep has --line-buffered
, and GNU sed
has -u
/ --unbuffered
, for use-cases like this, or for example piping the output of your python program. e.g. ./slowly-output-stuff | grep --line-buffered 'foo.*bar'
.
add a comment |
Another option (if you don't care about the contents, just the progress) is pv
:
NAME
pv - monitor the progress of data through a pipe
SYNOPSIS
pv [OPTION] [FILE]...
pv [-h|-V]
Introduce this in your pipeline and it will show you the number of bytes processed as well as the speed they go through the pipeline.
If the content is what you actually want to monitor, then tee
is the best choice, as the other answer indicates.
1
There's no pipeline, just file redirection. And it won't solve the buffering problem.
– Barmar
6 hours ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "3"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fsuperuser.com%2fquestions%2f1421123%2fwatching-something-be-written-to-a-file-live-with-tail%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
You may also need to explicitly flush the buffer for it to get piped upon generation. This is because output is typically only printed when the pipe's buffer fills up (which is in kilobytes I belive), and when the stdin message ends. This is probably to save on read/writes. You could do this after every print, or if you are looping, after the last print within the loop.
import sys
...
print('Some message')
sys.stdout.flush()
New contributor
4
If you have read this far, please don't be thinking of closing and re-opening the file to do this, the seeks will be a problem, especially for very large files. (I've seen this done!).
– mckenzm
21 hours ago
2
You can also useprint
'sflush
parameter to do just as well. For example,print('some message', flush=True)
.
– Dan
12 hours ago
4
It has nothing to do with the pipe's buffer, but with thestdout
mechanism which doesn't flush after newline if it doesn't write to a tty.
– glglgl
11 hours ago
add a comment |
You may also need to explicitly flush the buffer for it to get piped upon generation. This is because output is typically only printed when the pipe's buffer fills up (which is in kilobytes I belive), and when the stdin message ends. This is probably to save on read/writes. You could do this after every print, or if you are looping, after the last print within the loop.
import sys
...
print('Some message')
sys.stdout.flush()
New contributor
4
If you have read this far, please don't be thinking of closing and re-opening the file to do this, the seeks will be a problem, especially for very large files. (I've seen this done!).
– mckenzm
21 hours ago
2
You can also useprint
'sflush
parameter to do just as well. For example,print('some message', flush=True)
.
– Dan
12 hours ago
4
It has nothing to do with the pipe's buffer, but with thestdout
mechanism which doesn't flush after newline if it doesn't write to a tty.
– glglgl
11 hours ago
add a comment |
You may also need to explicitly flush the buffer for it to get piped upon generation. This is because output is typically only printed when the pipe's buffer fills up (which is in kilobytes I belive), and when the stdin message ends. This is probably to save on read/writes. You could do this after every print, or if you are looping, after the last print within the loop.
import sys
...
print('Some message')
sys.stdout.flush()
New contributor
You may also need to explicitly flush the buffer for it to get piped upon generation. This is because output is typically only printed when the pipe's buffer fills up (which is in kilobytes I belive), and when the stdin message ends. This is probably to save on read/writes. You could do this after every print, or if you are looping, after the last print within the loop.
import sys
...
print('Some message')
sys.stdout.flush()
New contributor
edited 20 hours ago
user2313067
2,1001911
2,1001911
New contributor
answered yesterday
DaveyDavey
32625
32625
New contributor
New contributor
4
If you have read this far, please don't be thinking of closing and re-opening the file to do this, the seeks will be a problem, especially for very large files. (I've seen this done!).
– mckenzm
21 hours ago
2
You can also useprint
'sflush
parameter to do just as well. For example,print('some message', flush=True)
.
– Dan
12 hours ago
4
It has nothing to do with the pipe's buffer, but with thestdout
mechanism which doesn't flush after newline if it doesn't write to a tty.
– glglgl
11 hours ago
add a comment |
4
If you have read this far, please don't be thinking of closing and re-opening the file to do this, the seeks will be a problem, especially for very large files. (I've seen this done!).
– mckenzm
21 hours ago
2
You can also useprint
'sflush
parameter to do just as well. For example,print('some message', flush=True)
.
– Dan
12 hours ago
4
It has nothing to do with the pipe's buffer, but with thestdout
mechanism which doesn't flush after newline if it doesn't write to a tty.
– glglgl
11 hours ago
4
4
If you have read this far, please don't be thinking of closing and re-opening the file to do this, the seeks will be a problem, especially for very large files. (I've seen this done!).
– mckenzm
21 hours ago
If you have read this far, please don't be thinking of closing and re-opening the file to do this, the seeks will be a problem, especially for very large files. (I've seen this done!).
– mckenzm
21 hours ago
2
2
You can also use
print
's flush
parameter to do just as well. For example, print('some message', flush=True)
.– Dan
12 hours ago
You can also use
print
's flush
parameter to do just as well. For example, print('some message', flush=True)
.– Dan
12 hours ago
4
4
It has nothing to do with the pipe's buffer, but with the
stdout
mechanism which doesn't flush after newline if it doesn't write to a tty.– glglgl
11 hours ago
It has nothing to do with the pipe's buffer, but with the
stdout
mechanism which doesn't flush after newline if it doesn't write to a tty.– glglgl
11 hours ago
add a comment |
Instead of trying to tail a live file, use tee
instead. It was made to do exactly what you're trying to do.
From man tee:
tee(1) - Linux man page
Name tee - read from standard input and write to standard output and files
Synopsis
tee [OPTION]... [FILE]...
Description
Copy standard input to each FILE, and also to standard output.
-a, --append
append to the given FILEs, do not overwrite
-i, --ignore-interrupts
ignore interrupt signals
--help
display this help and exit
--version
output version information and exit
If a FILE is -, copy again to standard output.
So in your case you'd run:
python myprog.py | tee output.txt
EDIT: As others have pointed out, this answer will run into the same issue OP was originally having unless sys.stdout.flush()
is used in the python program as described in Davey's accepted answer. The testing I did before posting this answer did not accurately reflect OP's use-case.
tee
can still be used as an alternative--albeit less than optimal--method of displaying the output while also writing to the file, but Davey's answer is clearly the correct and best answer.
tail in another thread is a good solution for when you've started the application before you decide you want to see the output though.
– Baldrickk
17 hours ago
7
That requires a permanent console session, this is why it’s often much easier to usetail -F
or even better the follow function ofless
. But in all cases theflush
should be used.
– eckes
15 hours ago
3
This won't solve the problem that the OP is having. Python's output to the pipe will be buffered just like output to the file.
– Barmar
7 hours ago
add a comment |
Instead of trying to tail a live file, use tee
instead. It was made to do exactly what you're trying to do.
From man tee:
tee(1) - Linux man page
Name tee - read from standard input and write to standard output and files
Synopsis
tee [OPTION]... [FILE]...
Description
Copy standard input to each FILE, and also to standard output.
-a, --append
append to the given FILEs, do not overwrite
-i, --ignore-interrupts
ignore interrupt signals
--help
display this help and exit
--version
output version information and exit
If a FILE is -, copy again to standard output.
So in your case you'd run:
python myprog.py | tee output.txt
EDIT: As others have pointed out, this answer will run into the same issue OP was originally having unless sys.stdout.flush()
is used in the python program as described in Davey's accepted answer. The testing I did before posting this answer did not accurately reflect OP's use-case.
tee
can still be used as an alternative--albeit less than optimal--method of displaying the output while also writing to the file, but Davey's answer is clearly the correct and best answer.
tail in another thread is a good solution for when you've started the application before you decide you want to see the output though.
– Baldrickk
17 hours ago
7
That requires a permanent console session, this is why it’s often much easier to usetail -F
or even better the follow function ofless
. But in all cases theflush
should be used.
– eckes
15 hours ago
3
This won't solve the problem that the OP is having. Python's output to the pipe will be buffered just like output to the file.
– Barmar
7 hours ago
add a comment |
Instead of trying to tail a live file, use tee
instead. It was made to do exactly what you're trying to do.
From man tee:
tee(1) - Linux man page
Name tee - read from standard input and write to standard output and files
Synopsis
tee [OPTION]... [FILE]...
Description
Copy standard input to each FILE, and also to standard output.
-a, --append
append to the given FILEs, do not overwrite
-i, --ignore-interrupts
ignore interrupt signals
--help
display this help and exit
--version
output version information and exit
If a FILE is -, copy again to standard output.
So in your case you'd run:
python myprog.py | tee output.txt
EDIT: As others have pointed out, this answer will run into the same issue OP was originally having unless sys.stdout.flush()
is used in the python program as described in Davey's accepted answer. The testing I did before posting this answer did not accurately reflect OP's use-case.
tee
can still be used as an alternative--albeit less than optimal--method of displaying the output while also writing to the file, but Davey's answer is clearly the correct and best answer.
Instead of trying to tail a live file, use tee
instead. It was made to do exactly what you're trying to do.
From man tee:
tee(1) - Linux man page
Name tee - read from standard input and write to standard output and files
Synopsis
tee [OPTION]... [FILE]...
Description
Copy standard input to each FILE, and also to standard output.
-a, --append
append to the given FILEs, do not overwrite
-i, --ignore-interrupts
ignore interrupt signals
--help
display this help and exit
--version
output version information and exit
If a FILE is -, copy again to standard output.
So in your case you'd run:
python myprog.py | tee output.txt
EDIT: As others have pointed out, this answer will run into the same issue OP was originally having unless sys.stdout.flush()
is used in the python program as described in Davey's accepted answer. The testing I did before posting this answer did not accurately reflect OP's use-case.
tee
can still be used as an alternative--albeit less than optimal--method of displaying the output while also writing to the file, but Davey's answer is clearly the correct and best answer.
edited 3 hours ago
answered yesterday
n8ten8te
5,33972235
5,33972235
tail in another thread is a good solution for when you've started the application before you decide you want to see the output though.
– Baldrickk
17 hours ago
7
That requires a permanent console session, this is why it’s often much easier to usetail -F
or even better the follow function ofless
. But in all cases theflush
should be used.
– eckes
15 hours ago
3
This won't solve the problem that the OP is having. Python's output to the pipe will be buffered just like output to the file.
– Barmar
7 hours ago
add a comment |
tail in another thread is a good solution for when you've started the application before you decide you want to see the output though.
– Baldrickk
17 hours ago
7
That requires a permanent console session, this is why it’s often much easier to usetail -F
or even better the follow function ofless
. But in all cases theflush
should be used.
– eckes
15 hours ago
3
This won't solve the problem that the OP is having. Python's output to the pipe will be buffered just like output to the file.
– Barmar
7 hours ago
tail in another thread is a good solution for when you've started the application before you decide you want to see the output though.
– Baldrickk
17 hours ago
tail in another thread is a good solution for when you've started the application before you decide you want to see the output though.
– Baldrickk
17 hours ago
7
7
That requires a permanent console session, this is why it’s often much easier to use
tail -F
or even better the follow function of less
. But in all cases the flush
should be used.– eckes
15 hours ago
That requires a permanent console session, this is why it’s often much easier to use
tail -F
or even better the follow function of less
. But in all cases the flush
should be used.– eckes
15 hours ago
3
3
This won't solve the problem that the OP is having. Python's output to the pipe will be buffered just like output to the file.
– Barmar
7 hours ago
This won't solve the problem that the OP is having. Python's output to the pipe will be buffered just like output to the file.
– Barmar
7 hours ago
add a comment |
Run python with the unbuffered flag:
python -u myprog.py > output.txt
Output will then print in real time.
New contributor
add a comment |
Run python with the unbuffered flag:
python -u myprog.py > output.txt
Output will then print in real time.
New contributor
add a comment |
Run python with the unbuffered flag:
python -u myprog.py > output.txt
Output will then print in real time.
New contributor
Run python with the unbuffered flag:
python -u myprog.py > output.txt
Output will then print in real time.
New contributor
New contributor
answered 8 hours ago
BHCBHC
711
711
New contributor
New contributor
add a comment |
add a comment |
Terminology: There is no pipe anywhere in this scenario. (I edited the question to fix that). Pipes are a different type of file (a buffer inside the kernel).
This is a redirect to a regular file.
C stdio, and Python, default to making stdout line-buffered when it's connected to a TTY, otherwise it's full-buffered. Line-buffered means the buffer is flushed after a newline. Full-buffered means it's only flushed to become visible to the OS (i.e. with a write()
system call) when it's full.
You will see output eventually, in chunks of maybe 4kiB at a time. (I don't know the default buffer size.) This is generally more efficient, and means fewer writes to your actual disk. But not great for interactive monitoring, because output is hidden inside the memory of the writing process until it's flushed.
On Stack Overflow, there's a Disable output buffering Python Q&A which lists many ways to get unbuffered (or line-buffered?) output to stdout in Python. The question itself summarizes the answers.
Options include running python -u
(Or I guess putting #!/usr/bin/python -u
at the top of your script), or using the PYTHONUNBUFFERED
environment variable for that program. Or explicit flushing after some/all print
functions, like @Davey's answer suggests.
Some other programs have similar options, e.g. GNU grep has --line-buffered
, and GNU sed
has -u
/ --unbuffered
, for use-cases like this, or for example piping the output of your python program. e.g. ./slowly-output-stuff | grep --line-buffered 'foo.*bar'
.
add a comment |
Terminology: There is no pipe anywhere in this scenario. (I edited the question to fix that). Pipes are a different type of file (a buffer inside the kernel).
This is a redirect to a regular file.
C stdio, and Python, default to making stdout line-buffered when it's connected to a TTY, otherwise it's full-buffered. Line-buffered means the buffer is flushed after a newline. Full-buffered means it's only flushed to become visible to the OS (i.e. with a write()
system call) when it's full.
You will see output eventually, in chunks of maybe 4kiB at a time. (I don't know the default buffer size.) This is generally more efficient, and means fewer writes to your actual disk. But not great for interactive monitoring, because output is hidden inside the memory of the writing process until it's flushed.
On Stack Overflow, there's a Disable output buffering Python Q&A which lists many ways to get unbuffered (or line-buffered?) output to stdout in Python. The question itself summarizes the answers.
Options include running python -u
(Or I guess putting #!/usr/bin/python -u
at the top of your script), or using the PYTHONUNBUFFERED
environment variable for that program. Or explicit flushing after some/all print
functions, like @Davey's answer suggests.
Some other programs have similar options, e.g. GNU grep has --line-buffered
, and GNU sed
has -u
/ --unbuffered
, for use-cases like this, or for example piping the output of your python program. e.g. ./slowly-output-stuff | grep --line-buffered 'foo.*bar'
.
add a comment |
Terminology: There is no pipe anywhere in this scenario. (I edited the question to fix that). Pipes are a different type of file (a buffer inside the kernel).
This is a redirect to a regular file.
C stdio, and Python, default to making stdout line-buffered when it's connected to a TTY, otherwise it's full-buffered. Line-buffered means the buffer is flushed after a newline. Full-buffered means it's only flushed to become visible to the OS (i.e. with a write()
system call) when it's full.
You will see output eventually, in chunks of maybe 4kiB at a time. (I don't know the default buffer size.) This is generally more efficient, and means fewer writes to your actual disk. But not great for interactive monitoring, because output is hidden inside the memory of the writing process until it's flushed.
On Stack Overflow, there's a Disable output buffering Python Q&A which lists many ways to get unbuffered (or line-buffered?) output to stdout in Python. The question itself summarizes the answers.
Options include running python -u
(Or I guess putting #!/usr/bin/python -u
at the top of your script), or using the PYTHONUNBUFFERED
environment variable for that program. Or explicit flushing after some/all print
functions, like @Davey's answer suggests.
Some other programs have similar options, e.g. GNU grep has --line-buffered
, and GNU sed
has -u
/ --unbuffered
, for use-cases like this, or for example piping the output of your python program. e.g. ./slowly-output-stuff | grep --line-buffered 'foo.*bar'
.
Terminology: There is no pipe anywhere in this scenario. (I edited the question to fix that). Pipes are a different type of file (a buffer inside the kernel).
This is a redirect to a regular file.
C stdio, and Python, default to making stdout line-buffered when it's connected to a TTY, otherwise it's full-buffered. Line-buffered means the buffer is flushed after a newline. Full-buffered means it's only flushed to become visible to the OS (i.e. with a write()
system call) when it's full.
You will see output eventually, in chunks of maybe 4kiB at a time. (I don't know the default buffer size.) This is generally more efficient, and means fewer writes to your actual disk. But not great for interactive monitoring, because output is hidden inside the memory of the writing process until it's flushed.
On Stack Overflow, there's a Disable output buffering Python Q&A which lists many ways to get unbuffered (or line-buffered?) output to stdout in Python. The question itself summarizes the answers.
Options include running python -u
(Or I guess putting #!/usr/bin/python -u
at the top of your script), or using the PYTHONUNBUFFERED
environment variable for that program. Or explicit flushing after some/all print
functions, like @Davey's answer suggests.
Some other programs have similar options, e.g. GNU grep has --line-buffered
, and GNU sed
has -u
/ --unbuffered
, for use-cases like this, or for example piping the output of your python program. e.g. ./slowly-output-stuff | grep --line-buffered 'foo.*bar'
.
answered 5 hours ago
Peter CordesPeter Cordes
2,4751621
2,4751621
add a comment |
add a comment |
Another option (if you don't care about the contents, just the progress) is pv
:
NAME
pv - monitor the progress of data through a pipe
SYNOPSIS
pv [OPTION] [FILE]...
pv [-h|-V]
Introduce this in your pipeline and it will show you the number of bytes processed as well as the speed they go through the pipeline.
If the content is what you actually want to monitor, then tee
is the best choice, as the other answer indicates.
1
There's no pipeline, just file redirection. And it won't solve the buffering problem.
– Barmar
6 hours ago
add a comment |
Another option (if you don't care about the contents, just the progress) is pv
:
NAME
pv - monitor the progress of data through a pipe
SYNOPSIS
pv [OPTION] [FILE]...
pv [-h|-V]
Introduce this in your pipeline and it will show you the number of bytes processed as well as the speed they go through the pipeline.
If the content is what you actually want to monitor, then tee
is the best choice, as the other answer indicates.
1
There's no pipeline, just file redirection. And it won't solve the buffering problem.
– Barmar
6 hours ago
add a comment |
Another option (if you don't care about the contents, just the progress) is pv
:
NAME
pv - monitor the progress of data through a pipe
SYNOPSIS
pv [OPTION] [FILE]...
pv [-h|-V]
Introduce this in your pipeline and it will show you the number of bytes processed as well as the speed they go through the pipeline.
If the content is what you actually want to monitor, then tee
is the best choice, as the other answer indicates.
Another option (if you don't care about the contents, just the progress) is pv
:
NAME
pv - monitor the progress of data through a pipe
SYNOPSIS
pv [OPTION] [FILE]...
pv [-h|-V]
Introduce this in your pipeline and it will show you the number of bytes processed as well as the speed they go through the pipeline.
If the content is what you actually want to monitor, then tee
is the best choice, as the other answer indicates.
answered 9 hours ago
rrauenzarrauenza
1313
1313
1
There's no pipeline, just file redirection. And it won't solve the buffering problem.
– Barmar
6 hours ago
add a comment |
1
There's no pipeline, just file redirection. And it won't solve the buffering problem.
– Barmar
6 hours ago
1
1
There's no pipeline, just file redirection. And it won't solve the buffering problem.
– Barmar
6 hours ago
There's no pipeline, just file redirection. And it won't solve the buffering problem.
– Barmar
6 hours ago
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Super User!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fsuperuser.com%2fquestions%2f1421123%2fwatching-something-be-written-to-a-file-live-with-tail%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
9
How about
python myprog.py | tee output.txt
instead?– n8te
yesterday
3
@n8te tee might show the same problem if the program isn't flushing the output buffer regularly. This needs flush() and tee.
– JPhi1618
22 hours ago
1
stdbuf
can be used to alter the buffering status of file descriptors.– studog
6 hours ago
Terminology: There is no pipe anywhere in this scenario. There's a redirect to a regular file. (Which causes C stdio and Python to decide to make stdout full-buffered instead of line-buffered because it's not a TTY). Pipes are a different type of file (a buffer inside the kernel). I edited your question to correct that.
– Peter Cordes
5 hours ago
Probably not needed in your situation but if you don't want to terminate the program you can use gdb and call fflush: see stackoverflow.com/questions/8251269/…
– Mark Wagner
5 hours ago