is 'sed' thread safe
If I have a shell/python script that uses sed to modify a file in place based on user inputs, and then two users run the same script at the same time or approx. same time, is 'sed' thread safe ? Or perhaps it is not an issue because the file_descripor that was opened by the first thread will be used to lock the file anyway ? thx
linux sed python
edited 7 hours ago
Jeff Schaller
42.9k1159137
asked 7 hours ago
terreysterreys
1613
add a comment |
If I have a shell/python script that uses sed to modify a file in place based on user inputs, and then two users run the same script at the same time or approx. same time, is 'sed' thread safe ? Or perhaps it is not an issue because the file_descripor that was opened by the first thread will be used to lock the file anyway ? thx
linux sed python
edited 7 hours ago
Jeff Schaller
42.9k1159137
asked 7 hours ago
terreysterreys
1613
2
Slightly more info wanted. How do you usesedfrom Python (and why, can't Python do things like that fairly effortlessly?).
– Kusalananda
7 hours ago
add a comment |
If I have a shell/python script that uses sed to modify a file in place based on user inputs, and then two users run the same script at the same time or approx. same time, is 'sed' thread safe ? Or perhaps it is not an issue because the file_descripor that was opened by the first thread will be used to lock the file anyway ? thx
linux sed python
edited 7 hours ago
Jeff Schaller
42.9k1159137
asked 7 hours ago
terreysterreys
1613
If I have a shell/python script that uses sed to modify a file in place based on user inputs, and then two users run the same script at the same time or approx. same time, is 'sed' thread safe ? Or perhaps it is not an issue because the file_descripor that was opened by the first thread will be used to lock the file anyway ? thx
linux sed python
linux sed python
edited 7 hours ago
Jeff Schaller
42.9k1159137
asked 7 hours ago
terreysterreys
1613
edited 7 hours ago
Jeff Schaller
42.9k1159137
asked 7 hours ago
terreysterreys
1613
edited 7 hours ago
Jeff Schaller
42.9k1159137
edited 7 hours ago
Jeff Schaller
42.9k1159137
edited 7 hours ago
Jeff Schaller
42.9k1159137
42.9k1159137
asked 7 hours ago
terreysterreys
1613
asked 7 hours ago
terreysterreys
1613
asked 7 hours ago
terreysterreys
1613
1613
2
Slightly more info wanted. How do you usesedfrom Python (and why, can't Python do things like that fairly effortlessly?).
– Kusalananda
7 hours ago
add a comment |
2
Slightly more info wanted. How do you usesedfrom Python (and why, can't Python do things like that fairly effortlessly?).
– Kusalananda
7 hours ago
2
2
Slightly more info wanted. How do you use
sed from Python (and why, can't Python do things like that fairly effortlessly?).– Kusalananda
7 hours ago
Slightly more info wanted. How do you use
sed from Python (and why, can't Python do things like that fairly effortlessly?).– Kusalananda
7 hours ago
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
I'm not going to nitpick on the awful terminology, but yes, GNU sed with its -i ("in-place") flag could be safely used by more than one process at the same time without any extra locking, because sed is not actually modifying the file in-place, but it's redirecting the output to a temporary file, and if everything goes well, it will rename(2) (move) the temporary file to the original file, and the rename(2) is guaranteed to be atomic:
$ strace sed -i s/o/e/g foo.txt
open("foo.txt", O_RDONLY) = 3
...
open("./sedDe80VL", O_RDWR|O_CREAT|O_EXCL, 0600) = 4
...
read(3, "foon", 4096) = 4
...
write(4, "feen", 4) = 4
read(3, "", 4096) = 0
...
close(3) = 0
close(4) = 0
rename("./sedDe80VL", "foo.txt") = 0
At any point, foo.txt will refer either to the complete original file or to the complete processed file, never to something in between the two.
answered 7 hours ago
mosvymosvy
7,8021530
3
But what can happen is that two copies ofsedstart reading the file, make different changes, storing them to their respective temporary files, which are then renamed into place one after other, without regard for the fact that there was anothersedworking on the file at the same time. The changes made by one of thesedprocesses would be lost.
– ilkkachu
6 hours ago
2
@ilkkachu that will still be completely consistent -- the file will be either modified by both processes in turn (in any order) or by just one of them. At no point will the file contain garbage resulting from both processes modifying it at the same time.
– mosvy
6 hours ago
7
it won't be total garbage, but having changes lost can still be an issue. The question refers to the file "being locked", and locking would usually refer to the secondsedprocess waiting until the first completed. That might just be awful terminology on their part; it's hard to say what they really care about, but that particular issue is still possible.
– ilkkachu
6 hours ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "106"
};
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: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
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%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f504810%2fis-sed-thread-safe%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
I'm not going to nitpick on the awful terminology, but yes, GNU sed with its -i ("in-place") flag could be safely used by more than one process at the same time without any extra locking, because sed is not actually modifying the file in-place, but it's redirecting the output to a temporary file, and if everything goes well, it will rename(2) (move) the temporary file to the original file, and the rename(2) is guaranteed to be atomic:
$ strace sed -i s/o/e/g foo.txt
open("foo.txt", O_RDONLY) = 3
...
open("./sedDe80VL", O_RDWR|O_CREAT|O_EXCL, 0600) = 4
...
read(3, "foon", 4096) = 4
...
write(4, "feen", 4) = 4
read(3, "", 4096) = 0
...
close(3) = 0
close(4) = 0
rename("./sedDe80VL", "foo.txt") = 0
At any point, foo.txt will refer either to the complete original file or to the complete processed file, never to something in between the two.
answered 7 hours ago
mosvymosvy
7,8021530
3
But what can happen is that two copies ofsedstart reading the file, make different changes, storing them to their respective temporary files, which are then renamed into place one after other, without regard for the fact that there was anothersedworking on the file at the same time. The changes made by one of thesedprocesses would be lost.
– ilkkachu
6 hours ago
2
@ilkkachu that will still be completely consistent -- the file will be either modified by both processes in turn (in any order) or by just one of them. At no point will the file contain garbage resulting from both processes modifying it at the same time.
– mosvy
6 hours ago
7
it won't be total garbage, but having changes lost can still be an issue. The question refers to the file "being locked", and locking would usually refer to the secondsedprocess waiting until the first completed. That might just be awful terminology on their part; it's hard to say what they really care about, but that particular issue is still possible.
– ilkkachu
6 hours ago
add a comment |
I'm not going to nitpick on the awful terminology, but yes, GNU sed with its -i ("in-place") flag could be safely used by more than one process at the same time without any extra locking, because sed is not actually modifying the file in-place, but it's redirecting the output to a temporary file, and if everything goes well, it will rename(2) (move) the temporary file to the original file, and the rename(2) is guaranteed to be atomic:
$ strace sed -i s/o/e/g foo.txt
open("foo.txt", O_RDONLY) = 3
...
open("./sedDe80VL", O_RDWR|O_CREAT|O_EXCL, 0600) = 4
...
read(3, "foon", 4096) = 4
...
write(4, "feen", 4) = 4
read(3, "", 4096) = 0
...
close(3) = 0
close(4) = 0
rename("./sedDe80VL", "foo.txt") = 0
At any point, foo.txt will refer either to the complete original file or to the complete processed file, never to something in between the two.
answered 7 hours ago
mosvymosvy
7,8021530
3
But what can happen is that two copies ofsedstart reading the file, make different changes, storing them to their respective temporary files, which are then renamed into place one after other, without regard for the fact that there was anothersedworking on the file at the same time. The changes made by one of thesedprocesses would be lost.
– ilkkachu
6 hours ago
2
@ilkkachu that will still be completely consistent -- the file will be either modified by both processes in turn (in any order) or by just one of them. At no point will the file contain garbage resulting from both processes modifying it at the same time.
– mosvy
6 hours ago
7
it won't be total garbage, but having changes lost can still be an issue. The question refers to the file "being locked", and locking would usually refer to the secondsedprocess waiting until the first completed. That might just be awful terminology on their part; it's hard to say what they really care about, but that particular issue is still possible.
– ilkkachu
6 hours ago
add a comment |
I'm not going to nitpick on the awful terminology, but yes, GNU sed with its -i ("in-place") flag could be safely used by more than one process at the same time without any extra locking, because sed is not actually modifying the file in-place, but it's redirecting the output to a temporary file, and if everything goes well, it will rename(2) (move) the temporary file to the original file, and the rename(2) is guaranteed to be atomic:
$ strace sed -i s/o/e/g foo.txt
open("foo.txt", O_RDONLY) = 3
...
open("./sedDe80VL", O_RDWR|O_CREAT|O_EXCL, 0600) = 4
...
read(3, "foon", 4096) = 4
...
write(4, "feen", 4) = 4
read(3, "", 4096) = 0
...
close(3) = 0
close(4) = 0
rename("./sedDe80VL", "foo.txt") = 0
At any point, foo.txt will refer either to the complete original file or to the complete processed file, never to something in between the two.
answered 7 hours ago
mosvymosvy
7,8021530
I'm not going to nitpick on the awful terminology, but yes, GNU sed with its -i ("in-place") flag could be safely used by more than one process at the same time without any extra locking, because sed is not actually modifying the file in-place, but it's redirecting the output to a temporary file, and if everything goes well, it will rename(2) (move) the temporary file to the original file, and the rename(2) is guaranteed to be atomic:
$ strace sed -i s/o/e/g foo.txt
open("foo.txt", O_RDONLY) = 3
...
open("./sedDe80VL", O_RDWR|O_CREAT|O_EXCL, 0600) = 4
...
read(3, "foon", 4096) = 4
...
write(4, "feen", 4) = 4
read(3, "", 4096) = 0
...
close(3) = 0
close(4) = 0
rename("./sedDe80VL", "foo.txt") = 0
At any point, foo.txt will refer either to the complete original file or to the complete processed file, never to something in between the two.
answered 7 hours ago
mosvymosvy
7,8021530
edited 7 hours ago
answered 7 hours ago
mosvymosvy
7,8021530
answered 7 hours ago
mosvymosvy
7,8021530
answered 7 hours ago
mosvymosvy
7,8021530
7,8021530
3
But what can happen is that two copies ofsedstart reading the file, make different changes, storing them to their respective temporary files, which are then renamed into place one after other, without regard for the fact that there was anothersedworking on the file at the same time. The changes made by one of thesedprocesses would be lost.
– ilkkachu
6 hours ago
2
@ilkkachu that will still be completely consistent -- the file will be either modified by both processes in turn (in any order) or by just one of them. At no point will the file contain garbage resulting from both processes modifying it at the same time.
– mosvy
6 hours ago
7
it won't be total garbage, but having changes lost can still be an issue. The question refers to the file "being locked", and locking would usually refer to the secondsedprocess waiting until the first completed. That might just be awful terminology on their part; it's hard to say what they really care about, but that particular issue is still possible.
– ilkkachu
6 hours ago
add a comment |
3
But what can happen is that two copies ofsedstart reading the file, make different changes, storing them to their respective temporary files, which are then renamed into place one after other, without regard for the fact that there was anothersedworking on the file at the same time. The changes made by one of thesedprocesses would be lost.
– ilkkachu
6 hours ago
2
@ilkkachu that will still be completely consistent -- the file will be either modified by both processes in turn (in any order) or by just one of them. At no point will the file contain garbage resulting from both processes modifying it at the same time.
– mosvy
6 hours ago
7
it won't be total garbage, but having changes lost can still be an issue. The question refers to the file "being locked", and locking would usually refer to the secondsedprocess waiting until the first completed. That might just be awful terminology on their part; it's hard to say what they really care about, but that particular issue is still possible.
– ilkkachu
6 hours ago
3
3
But what can happen is that two copies of
sed start reading the file, make different changes, storing them to their respective temporary files, which are then renamed into place one after other, without regard for the fact that there was another sed working on the file at the same time. The changes made by one of the sed processes would be lost.– ilkkachu
6 hours ago
But what can happen is that two copies of
sed start reading the file, make different changes, storing them to their respective temporary files, which are then renamed into place one after other, without regard for the fact that there was another sed working on the file at the same time. The changes made by one of the sed processes would be lost.– ilkkachu
6 hours ago
2
2
@ilkkachu that will still be completely consistent -- the file will be either modified by both processes in turn (in any order) or by just one of them. At no point will the file contain garbage resulting from both processes modifying it at the same time.
– mosvy
6 hours ago
@ilkkachu that will still be completely consistent -- the file will be either modified by both processes in turn (in any order) or by just one of them. At no point will the file contain garbage resulting from both processes modifying it at the same time.
– mosvy
6 hours ago
7
7
it won't be total garbage, but having changes lost can still be an issue. The question refers to the file "being locked", and locking would usually refer to the second
sed process waiting until the first completed. That might just be awful terminology on their part; it's hard to say what they really care about, but that particular issue is still possible.– ilkkachu
6 hours ago
it won't be total garbage, but having changes lost can still be an issue. The question refers to the file "being locked", and locking would usually refer to the second
sed process waiting until the first completed. That might just be awful terminology on their part; it's hard to say what they really care about, but that particular issue is still possible.– ilkkachu
6 hours ago
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Unix & Linux Stack Exchange!
- 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%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f504810%2fis-sed-thread-safe%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
2
Slightly more info wanted. How do you use
sedfrom Python (and why, can't Python do things like that fairly effortlessly?).– Kusalananda
7 hours ago