Watching something be written to a file live with tail





.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ height:90px;width:728px;box-sizing:border-box;
}







24















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?










share|improve this question




















  • 10





    How about python myprog.py | tee output.txt instead?

    – n8te
    Apr 3 at 23:35






  • 7





    @n8te tee might show the same problem if the program isn't flushing the output buffer regularly. This needs flush() and tee.

    – JPhi1618
    Apr 4 at 2:42






  • 1





    stdbuf can be used to alter the buffering status of file descriptors.

    – studog
    2 days ago






  • 1





    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
    2 days ago








  • 2





    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
    2 days ago


















24















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?










share|improve this question




















  • 10





    How about python myprog.py | tee output.txt instead?

    – n8te
    Apr 3 at 23:35






  • 7





    @n8te tee might show the same problem if the program isn't flushing the output buffer regularly. This needs flush() and tee.

    – JPhi1618
    Apr 4 at 2:42






  • 1





    stdbuf can be used to alter the buffering status of file descriptors.

    – studog
    2 days ago






  • 1





    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
    2 days ago








  • 2





    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
    2 days ago














24












24








24


4






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?










share|improve this question
















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






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 2 days ago









Peter Cordes

2,5451622




2,5451622










asked Apr 3 at 23:31









interstarinterstar

433513




433513








  • 10





    How about python myprog.py | tee output.txt instead?

    – n8te
    Apr 3 at 23:35






  • 7





    @n8te tee might show the same problem if the program isn't flushing the output buffer regularly. This needs flush() and tee.

    – JPhi1618
    Apr 4 at 2:42






  • 1





    stdbuf can be used to alter the buffering status of file descriptors.

    – studog
    2 days ago






  • 1





    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
    2 days ago








  • 2





    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
    2 days ago














  • 10





    How about python myprog.py | tee output.txt instead?

    – n8te
    Apr 3 at 23:35






  • 7





    @n8te tee might show the same problem if the program isn't flushing the output buffer regularly. This needs flush() and tee.

    – JPhi1618
    Apr 4 at 2:42






  • 1





    stdbuf can be used to alter the buffering status of file descriptors.

    – studog
    2 days ago






  • 1





    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
    2 days ago








  • 2





    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
    2 days ago








10




10





How about python myprog.py | tee output.txt instead?

– n8te
Apr 3 at 23:35





How about python myprog.py | tee output.txt instead?

– n8te
Apr 3 at 23:35




7




7





@n8te tee might show the same problem if the program isn't flushing the output buffer regularly. This needs flush() and tee.

– JPhi1618
Apr 4 at 2:42





@n8te tee might show the same problem if the program isn't flushing the output buffer regularly. This needs flush() and tee.

– JPhi1618
Apr 4 at 2:42




1




1





stdbuf can be used to alter the buffering status of file descriptors.

– studog
2 days ago





stdbuf can be used to alter the buffering status of file descriptors.

– studog
2 days ago




1




1





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
2 days 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
2 days ago






2




2





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
2 days 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
2 days ago










4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes


















39














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()





share|improve this answer










New contributor




Davey is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
















  • 7





    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
    2 days ago






  • 10





    You can also use print's flush parameter to do just as well. For example, print('some message', flush=True).

    – Dan
    2 days ago








  • 12





    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
    2 days ago






  • 1





    Instead of add flush() calls to the program, you can also use Python's -u command line switch; see BHC's answer.

    – Roel Schroeven
    yesterday






  • 1





    @glglgl Please explain. I don't actually know what you mean by that; how is "the stdout mechanism" different to that of any other file?

    – wizzwizz4
    yesterday





















29














Run python with the unbuffered flag:



python -u myprog.py > output.txt


Output will then print in real time.






share|improve this answer








New contributor




BHC is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
















  • 4





    This is the correct answer. Python by default writes unbuffered (or actually line-buffered for text I/O) when writing to the console, but buffered when stdout is redirected to a file. -u forces Python to be unbuffered (or line-buffered for text) for writes.

    – Roel Schroeven
    yesterday











  • Know nothing of python but when I read what was happening I thought "gee, sounds like it is buffering output...."

    – ivanivan
    yesterday



















19














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.






share|improve this answer





















  • 1





    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
    2 days ago






  • 11





    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
    2 days ago






  • 8





    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
    2 days ago



















9














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'.






share|improve this answer
























    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
    });


    }
    });














    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    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

























    4 Answers
    4






    active

    oldest

    votes








    4 Answers
    4






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    39














    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()





    share|improve this answer










    New contributor




    Davey is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.
















    • 7





      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
      2 days ago






    • 10





      You can also use print's flush parameter to do just as well. For example, print('some message', flush=True).

      – Dan
      2 days ago








    • 12





      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
      2 days ago






    • 1





      Instead of add flush() calls to the program, you can also use Python's -u command line switch; see BHC's answer.

      – Roel Schroeven
      yesterday






    • 1





      @glglgl Please explain. I don't actually know what you mean by that; how is "the stdout mechanism" different to that of any other file?

      – wizzwizz4
      yesterday


















    39














    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()





    share|improve this answer










    New contributor




    Davey is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.
















    • 7





      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
      2 days ago






    • 10





      You can also use print's flush parameter to do just as well. For example, print('some message', flush=True).

      – Dan
      2 days ago








    • 12





      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
      2 days ago






    • 1





      Instead of add flush() calls to the program, you can also use Python's -u command line switch; see BHC's answer.

      – Roel Schroeven
      yesterday






    • 1





      @glglgl Please explain. I don't actually know what you mean by that; how is "the stdout mechanism" different to that of any other file?

      – wizzwizz4
      yesterday
















    39












    39








    39







    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()





    share|improve this answer










    New contributor




    Davey is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.










    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()






    share|improve this answer










    New contributor




    Davey is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.









    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer








    edited 2 days ago









    user2313067

    2,1001911




    2,1001911






    New contributor




    Davey is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.









    answered Apr 4 at 0:05









    DaveyDavey

    46225




    46225




    New contributor




    Davey is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.





    New contributor





    Davey is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.






    Davey is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.








    • 7





      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
      2 days ago






    • 10





      You can also use print's flush parameter to do just as well. For example, print('some message', flush=True).

      – Dan
      2 days ago








    • 12





      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
      2 days ago






    • 1





      Instead of add flush() calls to the program, you can also use Python's -u command line switch; see BHC's answer.

      – Roel Schroeven
      yesterday






    • 1





      @glglgl Please explain. I don't actually know what you mean by that; how is "the stdout mechanism" different to that of any other file?

      – wizzwizz4
      yesterday
















    • 7





      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
      2 days ago






    • 10





      You can also use print's flush parameter to do just as well. For example, print('some message', flush=True).

      – Dan
      2 days ago








    • 12





      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
      2 days ago






    • 1





      Instead of add flush() calls to the program, you can also use Python's -u command line switch; see BHC's answer.

      – Roel Schroeven
      yesterday






    • 1





      @glglgl Please explain. I don't actually know what you mean by that; how is "the stdout mechanism" different to that of any other file?

      – wizzwizz4
      yesterday










    7




    7





    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
    2 days 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
    2 days ago




    10




    10





    You can also use print's flush parameter to do just as well. For example, print('some message', flush=True).

    – Dan
    2 days ago







    You can also use print's flush parameter to do just as well. For example, print('some message', flush=True).

    – Dan
    2 days ago






    12




    12





    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
    2 days 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
    2 days ago




    1




    1





    Instead of add flush() calls to the program, you can also use Python's -u command line switch; see BHC's answer.

    – Roel Schroeven
    yesterday





    Instead of add flush() calls to the program, you can also use Python's -u command line switch; see BHC's answer.

    – Roel Schroeven
    yesterday




    1




    1





    @glglgl Please explain. I don't actually know what you mean by that; how is "the stdout mechanism" different to that of any other file?

    – wizzwizz4
    yesterday







    @glglgl Please explain. I don't actually know what you mean by that; how is "the stdout mechanism" different to that of any other file?

    – wizzwizz4
    yesterday















    29














    Run python with the unbuffered flag:



    python -u myprog.py > output.txt


    Output will then print in real time.






    share|improve this answer








    New contributor




    BHC is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.
















    • 4





      This is the correct answer. Python by default writes unbuffered (or actually line-buffered for text I/O) when writing to the console, but buffered when stdout is redirected to a file. -u forces Python to be unbuffered (or line-buffered for text) for writes.

      – Roel Schroeven
      yesterday











    • Know nothing of python but when I read what was happening I thought "gee, sounds like it is buffering output...."

      – ivanivan
      yesterday
















    29














    Run python with the unbuffered flag:



    python -u myprog.py > output.txt


    Output will then print in real time.






    share|improve this answer








    New contributor




    BHC is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.
















    • 4





      This is the correct answer. Python by default writes unbuffered (or actually line-buffered for text I/O) when writing to the console, but buffered when stdout is redirected to a file. -u forces Python to be unbuffered (or line-buffered for text) for writes.

      – Roel Schroeven
      yesterday











    • Know nothing of python but when I read what was happening I thought "gee, sounds like it is buffering output...."

      – ivanivan
      yesterday














    29












    29








    29







    Run python with the unbuffered flag:



    python -u myprog.py > output.txt


    Output will then print in real time.






    share|improve this answer








    New contributor




    BHC is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.










    Run python with the unbuffered flag:



    python -u myprog.py > output.txt


    Output will then print in real time.







    share|improve this answer








    New contributor




    BHC is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.









    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer






    New contributor




    BHC is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.









    answered 2 days ago









    BHCBHC

    39913




    39913




    New contributor




    BHC is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.





    New contributor





    BHC is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.






    BHC is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.








    • 4





      This is the correct answer. Python by default writes unbuffered (or actually line-buffered for text I/O) when writing to the console, but buffered when stdout is redirected to a file. -u forces Python to be unbuffered (or line-buffered for text) for writes.

      – Roel Schroeven
      yesterday











    • Know nothing of python but when I read what was happening I thought "gee, sounds like it is buffering output...."

      – ivanivan
      yesterday














    • 4





      This is the correct answer. Python by default writes unbuffered (or actually line-buffered for text I/O) when writing to the console, but buffered when stdout is redirected to a file. -u forces Python to be unbuffered (or line-buffered for text) for writes.

      – Roel Schroeven
      yesterday











    • Know nothing of python but when I read what was happening I thought "gee, sounds like it is buffering output...."

      – ivanivan
      yesterday








    4




    4





    This is the correct answer. Python by default writes unbuffered (or actually line-buffered for text I/O) when writing to the console, but buffered when stdout is redirected to a file. -u forces Python to be unbuffered (or line-buffered for text) for writes.

    – Roel Schroeven
    yesterday





    This is the correct answer. Python by default writes unbuffered (or actually line-buffered for text I/O) when writing to the console, but buffered when stdout is redirected to a file. -u forces Python to be unbuffered (or line-buffered for text) for writes.

    – Roel Schroeven
    yesterday













    Know nothing of python but when I read what was happening I thought "gee, sounds like it is buffering output...."

    – ivanivan
    yesterday





    Know nothing of python but when I read what was happening I thought "gee, sounds like it is buffering output...."

    – ivanivan
    yesterday











    19














    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.






    share|improve this answer





















    • 1





      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
      2 days ago






    • 11





      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
      2 days ago






    • 8





      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
      2 days ago
















    19














    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.






    share|improve this answer





















    • 1





      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
      2 days ago






    • 11





      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
      2 days ago






    • 8





      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
      2 days ago














    19












    19








    19







    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.






    share|improve this 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.







    share|improve this answer














    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer








    edited 2 days ago

























    answered Apr 4 at 0:11









    n8ten8te

    5,38072235




    5,38072235








    • 1





      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
      2 days ago






    • 11





      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
      2 days ago






    • 8





      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
      2 days ago














    • 1





      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
      2 days ago






    • 11





      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
      2 days ago






    • 8





      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
      2 days ago








    1




    1





    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
    2 days 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
    2 days ago




    11




    11





    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
    2 days 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
    2 days ago




    8




    8





    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
    2 days 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
    2 days ago











    9














    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'.






    share|improve this answer




























      9














      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'.






      share|improve this answer


























        9












        9








        9







        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'.






        share|improve this answer













        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'.







        share|improve this answer












        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer










        answered 2 days ago









        Peter CordesPeter Cordes

        2,5451622




        2,5451622






























            draft saved

            draft discarded




















































            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.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            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





















































            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







            Popular posts from this blog

            數位音樂下載

            When can things happen in Etherscan, such as the picture below?

            格利澤436b