At the end of a script, I would like to return the peak memory usage. After reading other questions, here is my script:
#!/usr/bin/env python
import sys, os, resource, platform
print platform.platform(), platform.python_version()
os.system("grep 'VmRSS' /proc/%s/status" % os.getpid())
print resource.getrusage(resource.RUSAGE_SELF).ru_maxrss
dat = [x for x in xrange(10000000)]
os.system("grep 'VmRSS' /proc/%s/status" % os.getpid())
print resource.getrusage(resource.RUSAGE_SELF).ru_maxrss
and here is what I get:
$ test.py
Linux-2.6.18-194.26.1.el5-x86_64-with-redhat-5.5-Final 2.7.2
VmRSS: 4472 kB
0
VmRSS: 322684 kB
0
Why is resource.getrusage always returning me 0?
The same thing happens interactively in a terminal. Can this be due to the way Python was specifically installed on my machine? (It's a computer cluster I'm using with others and managed by admins.)
Edit: same thing happen when I use subprocess; executing this script
#!/usr/bin/env python
import sys, os, resource, platform
from subprocess import Popen, PIPE
print platform.platform(), platform.python_version()
p = Popen(["grep", "VmRSS", "/proc/%s/status" % os.getpid()], shell=False, stdout=PIPE)
print p.communicate()
print "resource:", resource.getrusage(resource.RUSAGE_SELF).ru_maxrss
dat = [x for x in xrange(10000000)]
p = Popen(["grep", "VmRSS", "/proc/%s/status" % os.getpid()], shell=False, stdout=PIPE)
print p.communicate()
print "resource:", resource.getrusage(resource.RUSAGE_SELF).ru_maxrss
gives this:
$ test.py
Linux-2.6.18-194.26.1.el5-x86_64-with-redhat-5.5-Final 2.7.2
('VmRSS:\t 4940 kB\n', None)
resource: 0
('VmRSS:\t 323152 kB\n', None)
resource: 0
Here's a way to replace the ´os.system´ call
In [131]: from subprocess import Popen, PIPE
In [132]: p = Popen(["grep", "VmRSS", "/proc/%s/status" % os.getpid()], shell=False, stdout=PIPE)
In [133]: p.communicate()
Out[133]: ('VmRSS:\t 340832 kB\n', None)
I also have no issue running the line you felt you have problems with:
In [134]: print resource.getrusage(resource.RUSAGE_SELF).ru_maxrss
340840
Edit
The rusage issue could well be a kernel dependent issue and simply not available on your red hat dist http://bytes.com/topic/python/answers/22489-getrusage
You could of course have a separate thread in your code looking at the current usage and storing throughout the execution of the code and store the highest value observed
Edit 2
Here's a full solution skipping resource and monitoring usages via Popen. The frequency of checking must of course be relevant but not frequent so that it eats all cpu.
#!/usr/bin/env python
import threading
import time
import re
import os
from subprocess import Popen, PIPE
maxUsage = 0
keepThreadRunning = True
def memWatch(freq=20):
global maxUsage
global keepThreadRunning
while keepThreadRunning:
p = Popen(["grep", "VmRSS", "/proc/%s/status" % os.getpid()],
shell=False, stdout=PIPE)
curUsage = int(re.search(r'\d+', p.communicate()[0]).group())
if curUsage > maxUsage:
maxUsage = curUsage
time.sleep(1.0 / freq)
if __name__ == "__main__":
t = threading.Thread(target=memWatch)
t.start()
print maxUsage
[p for p in range(1000000)]
print maxUsage
[str(p) for p in range(1000000)]
print maxUsage
keepThreadRunning = False
t.join()
The memWatch function can be optimized by calculating the sleep time once, not reformatting the path to the process each loop and compiling the regular expression before entering the while loop. But in all I hope that was the functionality you sought.
Related
I want Python to kill this process if the output of the child process meets the criteria
For example this is a infinity loop while_file.py, it print 0 to 999 then looks like there's no response.
i = 0
while 1:
if i < 1000:
print i
i += 1
I want to check if the output of the child process is 999, then kill it.
import os
import signal
import subprocess
def run_cmd(cmd):
pro = subprocess.Popen(cmd, stdout=subprocess.PIPE,
shell=True, preexec_fn=os.setsid)
while True:
r = pro.stdout.read()
print r
if r == 999:
os.killpg(os.getpgid(pro.pid), signal.SIGTERM)
if __name__=='__main__':
print run_cmd('python while_file.py')
But it seems no response... why? Is it be blocked?
There are a couple of problems:
"read" function (from pro.stoud.read) reads the whole file (until EOF). Which in your case will not work because the stdout is never close, which means no EOF. You should use readline
when you are reading you are reading strings not numbers (so you should compare with "999" not with 999)
I would recommend making sure there is no buffering (can get nasty later if something stays in a buffer)
The changed codes:
import sys
i = 0
while True:
if i < 1000:
print i
sys.stdout.flush()
i += 1
and
import os
import signal
import subprocess
def run_cmd(cmd):
pro = subprocess.Popen(cmd, stdout=subprocess.PIPE,
shell=True, preexec_fn=os.setsid)
while True:
r = pro.stdout.readline()
r = r.strip()
print(r)
if r == "999":
os.killpg(os.getpgid(pro.pid), signal.SIGTERM)
print("Process killed")
break
if __name__=='__main__':
print run_cmd('PYTHONUNBUFFERED=1; python a.py')
I don't know if it is a good idea or not, but here is a way you can do it:
while_file.py
i = 0
while 1:
if i < 1000:
print(i)
i += 1
stackoverflow.py
import os
import signal
import subprocess
def run_cmd(cmd):
pro = subprocess.Popen(cmd, stdout=subprocess.PIPE, shell=True, preexec_fn=os.setsid)
for line in iter(pro.stdout.readline, ''):
r = line.rstrip()
print(r)
if r == b'999':
os.killpg(os.getpgid(pro.pid), signal.SIGTERM)
print("True !")
if __name__ == '__main__':
print(run_cmd('python while_file.py'))
I have a python subprocess that I'm trying to read output and error streams from. Currently I have it working, but I'm only able to read from stderr after I've finished reading from stdout. Here's what it looks like:
process = subprocess.Popen(command, stdout=subprocess.PIPE, stderr=subprocess.PIPE)
stdout_iterator = iter(process.stdout.readline, b"")
stderr_iterator = iter(process.stderr.readline, b"")
for line in stdout_iterator:
# Do stuff with line
print line
for line in stderr_iterator:
# Do stuff with line
print line
As you can see, the stderr for loop can't start until the stdout loop completes. How can I modify this to be able to read from both in the correct order the lines come in?
To clarify: I still need to be able to tell whether a line came from stdout or stderr because they will be treated differently in my code.
The code in your question may deadlock if the child process produces enough output on stderr (~100KB on my Linux machine).
There is a communicate() method that allows to read from both stdout and stderr separately:
from subprocess import Popen, PIPE
process = Popen(command, stdout=PIPE, stderr=PIPE)
output, err = process.communicate()
If you need to read the streams while the child process is still running then the portable solution is to use threads (not tested):
from subprocess import Popen, PIPE
from threading import Thread
from Queue import Queue # Python 2
def reader(pipe, queue):
try:
with pipe:
for line in iter(pipe.readline, b''):
queue.put((pipe, line))
finally:
queue.put(None)
process = Popen(command, stdout=PIPE, stderr=PIPE, bufsize=1)
q = Queue()
Thread(target=reader, args=[process.stdout, q]).start()
Thread(target=reader, args=[process.stderr, q]).start()
for _ in range(2):
for source, line in iter(q.get, None):
print "%s: %s" % (source, line),
See:
Python: read streaming input from subprocess.communicate()
Non-blocking read on a subprocess.PIPE in python
Python subprocess get children's output to file and terminal?
Here's a solution based on selectors, but one that preserves order, and streams variable-length characters (even single chars).
The trick is to use read1(), instead of read().
import selectors
import subprocess
import sys
p = subprocess.Popen(
["python", "random_out.py"], stdout=subprocess.PIPE, stderr=subprocess.PIPE
)
sel = selectors.DefaultSelector()
sel.register(p.stdout, selectors.EVENT_READ)
sel.register(p.stderr, selectors.EVENT_READ)
while True:
for key, _ in sel.select():
data = key.fileobj.read1().decode()
if not data:
exit()
if key.fileobj is p.stdout:
print(data, end="")
else:
print(data, end="", file=sys.stderr)
If you want a test program, use this.
import sys
from time import sleep
for i in range(10):
print(f" x{i} ", file=sys.stderr, end="")
sleep(0.1)
print(f" y{i} ", end="")
sleep(0.1)
The order in which a process writes data to different pipes is lost after write.
There is no way you can tell if stdout has been written before stderr.
You can try to read data simultaneously from multiple file descriptors in a non-blocking way
as soon as data is available, but this would only minimize the probability that the order is incorrect.
This program should demonstrate this:
#!/usr/bin/env python
# -*- coding: utf-8 -*-
import os
import select
import subprocess
testapps={
'slow': '''
import os
import time
os.write(1, 'aaa')
time.sleep(0.01)
os.write(2, 'bbb')
time.sleep(0.01)
os.write(1, 'ccc')
''',
'fast': '''
import os
os.write(1, 'aaa')
os.write(2, 'bbb')
os.write(1, 'ccc')
''',
'fast2': '''
import os
os.write(1, 'aaa')
os.write(2, 'bbbbbbbbbbbbbbb')
os.write(1, 'ccc')
'''
}
def readfds(fds, maxread):
while True:
fdsin, _, _ = select.select(fds,[],[])
for fd in fdsin:
s = os.read(fd, maxread)
if len(s) == 0:
fds.remove(fd)
continue
yield fd, s
if fds == []:
break
def readfromapp(app, rounds=10, maxread=1024):
f=open('testapp.py', 'w')
f.write(testapps[app])
f.close()
results={}
for i in range(0, rounds):
p = subprocess.Popen(['python', 'testapp.py'], stdout=subprocess.PIPE
, stderr=subprocess.PIPE)
data=''
for (fd, s) in readfds([p.stdout.fileno(), p.stderr.fileno()], maxread):
data = data + s
results[data] = results[data] + 1 if data in results else 1
print 'running %i rounds %s with maxread=%i' % (rounds, app, maxread)
results = sorted(results.items(), key=lambda (k,v): k, reverse=False)
for data, count in results:
print '%03i x %s' % (count, data)
print
print "=> if output is produced slowly this should work as whished"
print " and should return: aaabbbccc"
readfromapp('slow', rounds=100, maxread=1024)
print
print "=> now mostly aaacccbbb is returnd, not as it should be"
readfromapp('fast', rounds=100, maxread=1024)
print
print "=> you could try to read data one by one, and return"
print " e.g. a whole line only when LF is read"
print " (b's should be finished before c's)"
readfromapp('fast', rounds=100, maxread=1)
print
print "=> but even this won't work ..."
readfromapp('fast2', rounds=100, maxread=1)
and outputs something like this:
=> if output is produced slowly this should work as whished
and should return: aaabbbccc
running 100 rounds slow with maxread=1024
100 x aaabbbccc
=> now mostly aaacccbbb is returnd, not as it should be
running 100 rounds fast with maxread=1024
006 x aaabbbccc
094 x aaacccbbb
=> you could try to read data one by one, and return
e.g. a whole line only when LF is read
(b's should be finished before c's)
running 100 rounds fast with maxread=1
003 x aaabbbccc
003 x aababcbcc
094 x abababccc
=> but even this won't work ...
running 100 rounds fast2 with maxread=1
003 x aaabbbbbbbbbbbbbbbccc
001 x aaacbcbcbbbbbbbbbbbbb
008 x aababcbcbcbbbbbbbbbbb
088 x abababcbcbcbbbbbbbbbb
This works for Python3 (3.6):
p = subprocess.Popen(cmd, stdout=subprocess.PIPE,
stderr=subprocess.PIPE, universal_newlines=True)
# Read both stdout and stderr simultaneously
sel = selectors.DefaultSelector()
sel.register(p.stdout, selectors.EVENT_READ)
sel.register(p.stderr, selectors.EVENT_READ)
ok = True
while ok:
for key, val1 in sel.select():
line = key.fileobj.readline()
if not line:
ok = False
break
if key.fileobj is p.stdout:
print(f"STDOUT: {line}", end="")
else:
print(f"STDERR: {line}", end="", file=sys.stderr)
from https://docs.python.org/3/library/subprocess.html#using-the-subprocess-module
If you wish to capture and combine both streams into one, use
stdout=PIPE and stderr=STDOUT instead of capture_output.
so the easiest solution would be:
process = subprocess.Popen(command, stdout=subprocess.PIPE, stderr=subprocess.STDOUT)
stdout_iterator = iter(process.stdout.readline, b"")
for line in stdout_iterator:
# Do stuff with line
print line
I know this question is very old, but this answer may help others who stumble upon this page in researching a solution for a similar situation, so I'm posting it anyway.
I've built a simple python snippet that will merge any number of pipes into a single one. Of course, as stated above, the order cannot be guaranteed, but this is as close as I think you can get in Python.
It spawns a thread for each of the pipes, reads them line by line and puts them into a Queue (which is FIFO). The main thread loops through the queue, yielding each line.
import threading, queue
def merge_pipes(**named_pipes):
r'''
Merges multiple pipes from subprocess.Popen (maybe other sources as well).
The keyword argument keys will be used in the output to identify the source
of the line.
Example:
p = subprocess.Popen(['some', 'call'],
stdin=subprocess.PIPE,
stdout=subprocess.PIPE,
stderr=subprocess.PIPE)
outputs = {'out': log.info, 'err': log.warn}
for name, line in merge_pipes(out=p.stdout, err=p.stderr):
outputs[name](line)
This will output stdout to the info logger, and stderr to the warning logger
'''
# Constants. Could also be placed outside of the method. I just put them here
# so the method is fully self-contained
PIPE_OPENED=1
PIPE_OUTPUT=2
PIPE_CLOSED=3
# Create a queue where the pipes will be read into
output = queue.Queue()
# This method is the run body for the threads that are instatiated below
# This could be easily rewritten to be outside of the merge_pipes method,
# but to make it fully self-contained I put it here
def pipe_reader(name, pipe):
r"""
reads a single pipe into the queue
"""
output.put( ( PIPE_OPENED, name, ) )
try:
for line in iter(pipe.readline,''):
output.put( ( PIPE_OUTPUT, name, line.rstrip(), ) )
finally:
output.put( ( PIPE_CLOSED, name, ) )
# Start a reader for each pipe
for name, pipe in named_pipes.items():
t=threading.Thread(target=pipe_reader, args=(name, pipe, ))
t.daemon = True
t.start()
# Use a counter to determine how many pipes are left open.
# If all are closed, we can return
pipe_count = 0
# Read the queue in order, blocking if there's no data
for data in iter(output.get,''):
code=data[0]
if code == PIPE_OPENED:
pipe_count += 1
elif code == PIPE_CLOSED:
pipe_count -= 1
elif code == PIPE_OUTPUT:
yield data[1:]
if pipe_count == 0:
return
This works for me (on windows):
https://github.com/waszil/subpiper
from subpiper import subpiper
def my_stdout_callback(line: str):
print(f'STDOUT: {line}')
def my_stderr_callback(line: str):
print(f'STDERR: {line}')
my_additional_path_list = [r'c:\important_location']
retcode = subpiper(cmd='echo magic',
stdout_callback=my_stdout_callback,
stderr_callback=my_stderr_callback,
add_path_list=my_additional_path_list)
I'm creating a command that will take a partial or whole name match of a process and kill its lowest pid - and thus the rest of the processes spawned from it. My code returns a min(list_of_process_ids) of 0, of which there is no min of 0. Please enlighten me as to why this is happening. Thank you.
#!/usr/bin/env python
"""Kill proceses by partial name matching"""
import os, sys
def usage():
return ("pskill.py process_name")
def pids(proc):
""" Find the processes"""
procs = []
procs = os.system("ps -ef|grep -i " + proc + "|grep -v grep|grep -v pfind|awk '{print $2}'")
procs = [int(x) for x in str(procs)]
return procs
def kill(procs):
ppid = min(procs)
os.system("kill " + str(ppid))
return ("Processes Killed...")
def main():
if len(sys.argv) != 2:
print (usage())
else:
proc = sys.argv[1]
pids(proc)
kill(pids(proc))
main()
You aren't grabbing the stdout, so you aren't actually getting anything other that the exist status of the command. Which you can be glad is 0 :-)
Try using the subprocess module. Specifically with the stdout option of piping the result to your python console...
I have a python subprocess that I'm trying to read output and error streams from. Currently I have it working, but I'm only able to read from stderr after I've finished reading from stdout. Here's what it looks like:
process = subprocess.Popen(command, stdout=subprocess.PIPE, stderr=subprocess.PIPE)
stdout_iterator = iter(process.stdout.readline, b"")
stderr_iterator = iter(process.stderr.readline, b"")
for line in stdout_iterator:
# Do stuff with line
print line
for line in stderr_iterator:
# Do stuff with line
print line
As you can see, the stderr for loop can't start until the stdout loop completes. How can I modify this to be able to read from both in the correct order the lines come in?
To clarify: I still need to be able to tell whether a line came from stdout or stderr because they will be treated differently in my code.
The code in your question may deadlock if the child process produces enough output on stderr (~100KB on my Linux machine).
There is a communicate() method that allows to read from both stdout and stderr separately:
from subprocess import Popen, PIPE
process = Popen(command, stdout=PIPE, stderr=PIPE)
output, err = process.communicate()
If you need to read the streams while the child process is still running then the portable solution is to use threads (not tested):
from subprocess import Popen, PIPE
from threading import Thread
from Queue import Queue # Python 2
def reader(pipe, queue):
try:
with pipe:
for line in iter(pipe.readline, b''):
queue.put((pipe, line))
finally:
queue.put(None)
process = Popen(command, stdout=PIPE, stderr=PIPE, bufsize=1)
q = Queue()
Thread(target=reader, args=[process.stdout, q]).start()
Thread(target=reader, args=[process.stderr, q]).start()
for _ in range(2):
for source, line in iter(q.get, None):
print "%s: %s" % (source, line),
See:
Python: read streaming input from subprocess.communicate()
Non-blocking read on a subprocess.PIPE in python
Python subprocess get children's output to file and terminal?
Here's a solution based on selectors, but one that preserves order, and streams variable-length characters (even single chars).
The trick is to use read1(), instead of read().
import selectors
import subprocess
import sys
p = subprocess.Popen(
["python", "random_out.py"], stdout=subprocess.PIPE, stderr=subprocess.PIPE
)
sel = selectors.DefaultSelector()
sel.register(p.stdout, selectors.EVENT_READ)
sel.register(p.stderr, selectors.EVENT_READ)
while True:
for key, _ in sel.select():
data = key.fileobj.read1().decode()
if not data:
exit()
if key.fileobj is p.stdout:
print(data, end="")
else:
print(data, end="", file=sys.stderr)
If you want a test program, use this.
import sys
from time import sleep
for i in range(10):
print(f" x{i} ", file=sys.stderr, end="")
sleep(0.1)
print(f" y{i} ", end="")
sleep(0.1)
The order in which a process writes data to different pipes is lost after write.
There is no way you can tell if stdout has been written before stderr.
You can try to read data simultaneously from multiple file descriptors in a non-blocking way
as soon as data is available, but this would only minimize the probability that the order is incorrect.
This program should demonstrate this:
#!/usr/bin/env python
# -*- coding: utf-8 -*-
import os
import select
import subprocess
testapps={
'slow': '''
import os
import time
os.write(1, 'aaa')
time.sleep(0.01)
os.write(2, 'bbb')
time.sleep(0.01)
os.write(1, 'ccc')
''',
'fast': '''
import os
os.write(1, 'aaa')
os.write(2, 'bbb')
os.write(1, 'ccc')
''',
'fast2': '''
import os
os.write(1, 'aaa')
os.write(2, 'bbbbbbbbbbbbbbb')
os.write(1, 'ccc')
'''
}
def readfds(fds, maxread):
while True:
fdsin, _, _ = select.select(fds,[],[])
for fd in fdsin:
s = os.read(fd, maxread)
if len(s) == 0:
fds.remove(fd)
continue
yield fd, s
if fds == []:
break
def readfromapp(app, rounds=10, maxread=1024):
f=open('testapp.py', 'w')
f.write(testapps[app])
f.close()
results={}
for i in range(0, rounds):
p = subprocess.Popen(['python', 'testapp.py'], stdout=subprocess.PIPE
, stderr=subprocess.PIPE)
data=''
for (fd, s) in readfds([p.stdout.fileno(), p.stderr.fileno()], maxread):
data = data + s
results[data] = results[data] + 1 if data in results else 1
print 'running %i rounds %s with maxread=%i' % (rounds, app, maxread)
results = sorted(results.items(), key=lambda (k,v): k, reverse=False)
for data, count in results:
print '%03i x %s' % (count, data)
print
print "=> if output is produced slowly this should work as whished"
print " and should return: aaabbbccc"
readfromapp('slow', rounds=100, maxread=1024)
print
print "=> now mostly aaacccbbb is returnd, not as it should be"
readfromapp('fast', rounds=100, maxread=1024)
print
print "=> you could try to read data one by one, and return"
print " e.g. a whole line only when LF is read"
print " (b's should be finished before c's)"
readfromapp('fast', rounds=100, maxread=1)
print
print "=> but even this won't work ..."
readfromapp('fast2', rounds=100, maxread=1)
and outputs something like this:
=> if output is produced slowly this should work as whished
and should return: aaabbbccc
running 100 rounds slow with maxread=1024
100 x aaabbbccc
=> now mostly aaacccbbb is returnd, not as it should be
running 100 rounds fast with maxread=1024
006 x aaabbbccc
094 x aaacccbbb
=> you could try to read data one by one, and return
e.g. a whole line only when LF is read
(b's should be finished before c's)
running 100 rounds fast with maxread=1
003 x aaabbbccc
003 x aababcbcc
094 x abababccc
=> but even this won't work ...
running 100 rounds fast2 with maxread=1
003 x aaabbbbbbbbbbbbbbbccc
001 x aaacbcbcbbbbbbbbbbbbb
008 x aababcbcbcbbbbbbbbbbb
088 x abababcbcbcbbbbbbbbbb
This works for Python3 (3.6):
p = subprocess.Popen(cmd, stdout=subprocess.PIPE,
stderr=subprocess.PIPE, universal_newlines=True)
# Read both stdout and stderr simultaneously
sel = selectors.DefaultSelector()
sel.register(p.stdout, selectors.EVENT_READ)
sel.register(p.stderr, selectors.EVENT_READ)
ok = True
while ok:
for key, val1 in sel.select():
line = key.fileobj.readline()
if not line:
ok = False
break
if key.fileobj is p.stdout:
print(f"STDOUT: {line}", end="")
else:
print(f"STDERR: {line}", end="", file=sys.stderr)
from https://docs.python.org/3/library/subprocess.html#using-the-subprocess-module
If you wish to capture and combine both streams into one, use
stdout=PIPE and stderr=STDOUT instead of capture_output.
so the easiest solution would be:
process = subprocess.Popen(command, stdout=subprocess.PIPE, stderr=subprocess.STDOUT)
stdout_iterator = iter(process.stdout.readline, b"")
for line in stdout_iterator:
# Do stuff with line
print line
I know this question is very old, but this answer may help others who stumble upon this page in researching a solution for a similar situation, so I'm posting it anyway.
I've built a simple python snippet that will merge any number of pipes into a single one. Of course, as stated above, the order cannot be guaranteed, but this is as close as I think you can get in Python.
It spawns a thread for each of the pipes, reads them line by line and puts them into a Queue (which is FIFO). The main thread loops through the queue, yielding each line.
import threading, queue
def merge_pipes(**named_pipes):
r'''
Merges multiple pipes from subprocess.Popen (maybe other sources as well).
The keyword argument keys will be used in the output to identify the source
of the line.
Example:
p = subprocess.Popen(['some', 'call'],
stdin=subprocess.PIPE,
stdout=subprocess.PIPE,
stderr=subprocess.PIPE)
outputs = {'out': log.info, 'err': log.warn}
for name, line in merge_pipes(out=p.stdout, err=p.stderr):
outputs[name](line)
This will output stdout to the info logger, and stderr to the warning logger
'''
# Constants. Could also be placed outside of the method. I just put them here
# so the method is fully self-contained
PIPE_OPENED=1
PIPE_OUTPUT=2
PIPE_CLOSED=3
# Create a queue where the pipes will be read into
output = queue.Queue()
# This method is the run body for the threads that are instatiated below
# This could be easily rewritten to be outside of the merge_pipes method,
# but to make it fully self-contained I put it here
def pipe_reader(name, pipe):
r"""
reads a single pipe into the queue
"""
output.put( ( PIPE_OPENED, name, ) )
try:
for line in iter(pipe.readline,''):
output.put( ( PIPE_OUTPUT, name, line.rstrip(), ) )
finally:
output.put( ( PIPE_CLOSED, name, ) )
# Start a reader for each pipe
for name, pipe in named_pipes.items():
t=threading.Thread(target=pipe_reader, args=(name, pipe, ))
t.daemon = True
t.start()
# Use a counter to determine how many pipes are left open.
# If all are closed, we can return
pipe_count = 0
# Read the queue in order, blocking if there's no data
for data in iter(output.get,''):
code=data[0]
if code == PIPE_OPENED:
pipe_count += 1
elif code == PIPE_CLOSED:
pipe_count -= 1
elif code == PIPE_OUTPUT:
yield data[1:]
if pipe_count == 0:
return
This works for me (on windows):
https://github.com/waszil/subpiper
from subpiper import subpiper
def my_stdout_callback(line: str):
print(f'STDOUT: {line}')
def my_stderr_callback(line: str):
print(f'STDERR: {line}')
my_additional_path_list = [r'c:\important_location']
retcode = subpiper(cmd='echo magic',
stdout_callback=my_stdout_callback,
stderr_callback=my_stderr_callback,
add_path_list=my_additional_path_list)
For example:
#!/usr/bin/env python3
# cmd.py
import time
for i in range(10):
print("Count %d" % i)
time.sleep(1)
#!/usr/bin/env python3
import subprocess
# useCmd.py
p = subprocess.Popen(['./cmd.py'], stdout=subprocess.PIPE)
out, err = p.communicate()
out = out.decode()
print(out)
In useCmd.py I can print out the output of cmd.py, but only after it's finished outputting. How can I print out it in realtime and still have it stored in a string? (sort of like tee in bash.)
If you don't have to deal with stdin, you could avoid using communicate that is blocking, and read directly from the process stdout until your stdout ends:
p = subprocess.Popen(['python', 'cmd.py'], stdout=subprocess.PIPE)
# out, err = p.communicate()
while True:
line = p.stdout.readline()
if line != '':
print line,
else:
break
related