PThreads.Consumer-Producer! printing in different files - c

Question

i m trying to implement the producer - consumer with threads.In my code below is working well except of the point where i try to print into 2 files.(one for prod and one for cons).I use fclose(stdout) . when i delete it inside producer then the print in producer file is ok but consumers no.when i deleted at all then all of the data printed into the consumer file.My question is what i should try to make the prints correctly( i need consumer to print in cons.out.txt and producer in prod_out.txt) .Also i didnt include check for threads to make it simple but it works well.
#include "head.h"
circular_buffer cb;
pthread_mutex_t lock;
pthread_cond_t cond;
char * data[6]; //is the data taken from cmd(argv[0-6]) first one is the program the other are parameters
int main(int argc , char *argv[]) {
validate(argv,argc); //if command arguments are valid go on
for(int i=0; i < argc; i++){
data[i]=argv[i]; //copy argv array to data array
}
cb_init(&cb,10,sizeof(int)); //initialization of circular buffer for 10 nodes + size of int each node
pthread_t cons, prod;
void *consumer(), *producer();
int rc = pthread_mutex_init(&lock, NULL);
rc = pthread_cond_init(&cond, NULL);
int id[]={1,2}; //prod id is 1 and cons 2
rc = pthread_create(&prod, NULL, producer, &id[0]);
rc = pthread_create(&cons, NULL, consumer, &id[1]);
rc=pthread_join(prod, NULL);
rc=pthread_join(cons, NULL);
rc = pthread_mutex_destroy(&lock);
rc = pthread_cond_destroy(&cond);
cb_free(&cb); //free allocated memory which is alocated in head
return 1;
}
void *consumer(void * id){
int thread_id= *((int*)id); //cast to (int)
int file;
FILE * fp2 = fopen("./cons_out.txt","wb"); //creates new file with "cons_out.txt" name
int i =10;
while(i > 0){
i--;
pthread_mutex_lock(&lock);
while(isEmpty(&cb)){
int rc = pthread_cond_wait(&cond,&lock);
}//end while
int item=0; // item that will be consumed
cb_pop_front(&cb,&item);
file = open("./cons_out.txt", O_APPEND | O_WRONLY, 0777 );//open file as new
if( file == -1 ) {//fail to open file
perror("./cons_out.txt");
return EXIT_FAILURE;
}
fclose(stdout);
dup2( file, STDOUT_FILENO); //change redirections
printf("Consumer %d : %d\n",thread_id,item); //print output to file
pthread_cond_signal(&cond);
pthread_mutex_unlock(&lock);
} //end while
return NULL;
} //end consumer()
void *producer(void * id){
int thread_id= *((int*)id); //cast to (*int)
int file1;
FILE * fp1 = fopen("./prod_in.txt","wb"); //creates new file with "prod_in.txt" name
for(int i=0; i<10; i++){ //it produce 10 numbers
pthread_mutex_lock(&lock);
while(isFull(&cb)){
int rc = pthread_cond_wait(&cond,&lock);
}//end while
int seed=1;
int item=rand(); // item of this producer
cb_push_back(&cb,&item);
file1 = open("./prod_in.txt", O_APPEND | O_WRONLY, 0777 );//open file as new
if( file1 == -1 ) {//fail to open file
perror("./prod_in.txt");
return EXIT_FAILURE;
}
fclose(stdout);
dup2( file1, STDOUT_FILENO); //change output
printf("Producer %i : %i\n",thread_id,item); //print output to file
pthread_cond_signal(&cond);
pthread_mutex_unlock(&lock);
} //end for
return NULL;
} //end Producer();

Answer 1

There is only one open file table for your whole process, shared by all threads in it. There is one entry in that table for the standard output, and your producer and consumer are contending for it. It's not clear why.
I'm inclined to think that the immediate reason for your troubles is that fclose()ing the stdout stream releases the stream-level resources, especially the buffer and state-tracking details. open()ing a file descriptor does not provide those, nor does dup2()ing a file descriptor into a FILE object representing a closed stream.
But it baffles me why you are making it so hard. Why in the world muck with duping file descriptors? Your producer and consumer already fopen() the wanted output files, thereby each obtaining its own stream connected with the appropriate file (fp1 and fp2). It seems to me that all you need to do, then, is to write to those streams via fprintf(), etc., instead of going to a lot of trouble to be able to use printf() instead.
That would be more efficient, too, since you oughtn't to need to keep opening and closing the files. Open each once, at the beginning, as you already do, and close each once, at the end, which you presently fail to do.