Consider the following scenario: I am opening a tar file (say abc.tar.gz), writing the data, and before closing the file descriptor, I am trying to extract the same file.
I am unable to do so. But if I extract the file after having closing the fd, it works fine.
I wonder what could be the reason.
All files has a position where data is read or written. After writing to the file, the position is at the end. Trying to read will attempt to read from that position. You have to change the position to the beginning of the file with a function like lseek.
Also, you did open the file in both read and write mode?
Edit
After reading your comments, I see you do not actually read the file from inside your program, but from an external program. Then it might be as simple as you not flushing the file to disk, which happens automatically when closing a file. You might want to check the fsync function for that, or possible the sync function.
Related
Assuming a plain text file, foo.txt, and two processes:
Process A, a shell script, overwrites the file in regular intervals
$ echo "example" > foo.txt
Process B, a C program, reads from the file in regular intervals
fopen("foo.txt", "r"); getline(buf, len, fp); fclose(fp);
In the C program, keeping the FILE* fp open after the initial fopen(), doing a rewind() and reading again does not seem to reflect the changes that have happened to the file in the meantime. Is the only way to see the updated contents by doing an fclose() and fopen() cycle, or is there a way to re-use the already opened FILE handle, yet reading the most recently written data?
For context, I'm simply trying to find the most efficient way of doing this.
On Unix/Linux, when you create a file with a name which already existed, the old file is not deleted or altered in any way. A new file is created and the directory is updated to point at the new file instead of the old one.
The old file will continue to exist as long as some directory entry points at it (Unix file systems allow the same file to be pointed to by multiple directories) or some program has an open file handle to the file, which is more relevant to your question.
As long as you don't close fp, it continues to refer to the original file, even if that file is no longer referenced by the filesystem. When you close fp, the file will get garbage collected automatically, and the next time you open foo.txt, you'll get a file descriptor for whatever file happens to have that name at that point in time.
In short, with the shell script you indicate, your C program must close and reopen the file in order to see the new contents.
Theoretically, it would be possible for the shell script to overwrite the same file without deleting it, but (a) that's tricky to get right; (b) it's prone to race conditions; and (c) closing and reopening the file is not that time-consuming. But if you did that, you would see the changes. [Note 1]
In particular, it's common (and easy) to append to an existing file, and if you have a shell script which does that, you can keep the file descriptor open and see the changes. However, in that case you would normally have already read to the end of the file before the new data was appended, and the standard C library treats the feof() indicator as sticky; once it gets set, you will continue to get an EOF indication from new reads. If you suspect that some process will be writing more data to the file, you should reset the EOF indication with fseek(fp, 0, SEEK_CUR); before retrying the read.
Notes
As #amadan points out in a comment, there are race conditions with echo text > foo.txt as well, although the window is a bit shorter. But you can definitely avoid race conditions by using the idiom echo text > temporary_file; mv -f temporary_file foo.txt, because the rename operation is atomic. Of course, that would definitely require you to close and reopen the file. But it's a good idea, particularly if the contents being written are long or critical, or if new files are created frequently.
I made a C program that reads a string from a .txt file, then it encrypts the string, and finally it writes the string in the same file.
The thing is that if I use fopen("D:\\Prueba.txt","w+"), the program doesn't work, it prints garbage like this )PHI N.
I've debugged and I know the error is there in that line, because if I use fopen("D:\\Prueba.txt","r+"), the program works, and it writes what it should.
But I want to use w+ because it will rewrite what the .txt file had. Why is w+ not working?
If you're opening with w+ to first read the content, that's not going to work. From C11:
w+: truncate to zero length or create text file for update.
What's probably happening is that you read data from the now empty file but don't correctly check that it worked. That would explain the weird "content" you see of )PHI N.
One solution is to open the file as with r, open another file with w, and transfer the contents, encrypting them as part of that process. Then close both, delete the original, and rename the new one to the original name. This will allow you to process arbitrarily-sized files since you process them a bit at a time.
If you don't want to use a temporary file, and you're sure you can store the entire content in memory, you could open it r+, get the content, the reopen it with a new mode, such as with:
FILE *readFh = fopen( "myfile.txt", "r+");
// Read in content, massage as needed.
FILE *writeFh = frepoen( NULL, "w+", readFh);
// Provided that worked, you should now have an empty file to write to.
// Write back your massaged data.
Is it possible to write to a file that was created with _O_TEMPORARY and then later read the data that was written to that file? I've tried flushing the buffer, but that doesn't seem to work: subsequent _read() calls still return 0 bytes.
Obviously closing the file after writing and opening it again won't work since closing the file will delete it (that's what _O_TEMPORARY does), so what alternative is there?
I have a scenario where i created pipe for communication between two child and parent. Parent writes (using write function)data to the pipe and closes the respective file descriptor. The problem is when i want to write data again to the pipe, the write function is returning error code -1. I think its because writing end has been closed in previous iteration. Then how to open the corresponding file descriptor after it has been closed once.
I tried using open() function which requires path to some file as arguement. But i am not using any files in my application. I have simple file descriptors (int arr[2]).
Is it possible to achieve above scenario with pipes????
Once a pipe is closed, it's closed. You can't bring it back.
If you want to write more to it, don't close it in the first place - it's as simple as that.
Thing to know about anything related to files (pipes are also some sort of files) under unix: file name is used only on opening file. Later until file is open, it is available forever until closed and name is never used again. When someone deletes file in another window while it is open, just name is gone, not file. This means:
File is still on disk
It has no name
It is still open
When it is closed, kernel removes it forever
Knowing this maybe helps to understand, why this would be nearly impossible to "reopen" file, pipe or anything similar again. File name and descriptor have different lifetimes.
The only exceptions are stdout and stderr whose descriptor are always known as 1 and 2.
im working in a code that detects changes in a file (a log file) then its process the changes with the help of fseek and ftell. but if the file get deleted and changed (with logrotate) the program stops but not dies, because it not detect more changes (even if the file is recreated). fseek dont show errors and eiter ftell.
how i can detect that file deletion? maybe a way to reopen the file with other FILE *var and comparing file descriptor. but how i can do that. ?
When a file gets deleted, it is not necessarily erased from your disk. In your case the program still has a handle to the old file. The old file handle will not get you any information about its deletion or replacement with another file.
An easy way to detect file deletion and recreation is using stat(2) and fstat(2). They give you a struct stat which contains the inode for the file. When a file is recreated (and still open) the files (old open and recreated) are different and thus the inodes are different. The inode field is st_ino. Yes, you need to poll this unless you wish to use Linux-features like inotify.
You can periodically close the file and open it again, that way you will open the newly created one. Files actually get deleted when there is no handle to the file (open file descriptor is a handle), you are still holding the old file.
On windows, you could set callbacks on the modifications of the FS. Here are details: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa365261(VS.85).aspx