We Keep Coding

Read from a large file and write to multiple files with java

I have an A.txt file of 100,000,000 records from 1 to 100000000, each record is one line. I have to read file A then write to file B and C, provided that even line writes to file B and the odd line writes to file C.
Required read and write time must be less than 40 seconds.
Below is the code that I already have but the runtime takes more than 50 seconds.
Does anyone have any other solution to reduce runtime?
Threading.java
import java.io.*;
import java.util.concurrent.LinkedBlockingQueue;
public class Threading implements Runnable {
LinkedBlockingQueue<String> queue = new LinkedBlockingQueue<>();
String file;
Boolean stop = false;
public Threading(String file) {
this.file = file;
}
public void addQueue(String row) {
queue.add();
}
public void Stop() {
stop = true;
}
public void run() {
try {
BufferedWriter bw = new BufferedWriter(new FileWriter(file));
while(!stop) {
try {
String rơ = queue.take();
bw.while(row + "\n");
} catch (Exception e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
bw.close();
} catch (Exception e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
}
ThreadCreate.java
// I used 2 threads to write to 2 files B and C
import java.io.*;
import java.util.List;
public class ThreadCreate {
public void startThread(File file) {
Threading t1 = new Threading("B.txt");
Threading t1 = new Threading("B.txt");
Thread td1 = new Thread(t1);
Thread td1 = new Thread(t1);
td1.start();
td2.start();
try {
BufferedReader br = new BufferedReader(new FileReader(file));
String line;
long start = System.currentTimeMillis();
while ((line = br.readLine()) != null) {
if (Integer.parseInt(line) % 2 == 0) {
t1.addQueue(line);
} else {
t2.addQueue(line);
}
}
t1.Stop();
t2.Stop();
br.close();
long end = System.currentTimeMillis();
System.out.println("Time to read file A and write file B, C: " + ((end - start)/1000) + "s");
} catch (Exception e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
}
Main.java
import java.io.*;
public class Main {
public static void main(String[] args) throws IOException {
File file = new File("A.txt");
//Write file B, C
ThreadCreate t = new ThreadCreate();
t.startThread(file);
}
}

Why are you making threads? That just slows things down. Threads are useful if the bottleneck is either the calculation itself or the blocking nature of the operation, and they only hurt if it is not. Here, it isn't: The CPU is just idling (the bottleneck will be the disk), and the nature of what it is blocking on means that multithreading does not help either: Telling a single SSD to write 2 boatloads of bytes in parallel is probably no faster (only slower, as it needs to bounce back and forth). If the target disk is a spinning disk, it is way slower - the write head cannot make clones of itself to go any faster, and by making it multithreaded, you are wasting a ton of time by asking the write head to bounce back and forth between the different write locations.
There's nothing that immediately strikes me as ripe for significant speedups.
Sometimes, writing a ton of data to a disk just takes 50 seconds. If that's not acceptable, buy a faster disk.

try memory mapped files
byte[] buffer = "foo bar foo bar text\n".getBytes();
int number_of_lines = 100000000;
FileChannel file = new RandomAccessFile("writeFIle.txt", "rw").getChannel();
ByteBuffer wrBuf = file.map(FileChannel.MapMode.READ_WRITE, 0, buffer.length * number_of_lines);
for (int i = 0; i < number_of_lines; i++)
{
wrBuf.put(buffer);
}
file.close();
Took to my computer (Dell, I7 processor, with SSD, 32GB RAM) a little over half a minute to run this code)

Process large text file concurrently

So I have a large text file, in this case it's roughly 4.5 GB, and I need to process the entire file as fast as is possible. Right now I have multi-threaded this using 3 threads (not including the main thread). An input thread for reading the input file, a processing thread to process the data, and an output thread to output the processed data to a file.
Currently, the bottleneck is the processing section. Therefore, I'd like to add more processing threads into the mix. However, this creates a situation where I've got multiple threads accessing the same BlockingQueue, and their results are therefore not maintaining the order of the input file.
An example of the functionality I'm looking for would be something like this:
Input file: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
Output file: ^ the same. Not 2, 1, 4, 3, 5 or any other combination.
I've written a dummy program that is identical in functionality to the actual program minus the processing part, (I can't give you the actual program due to the processing class containing info that is confidential). I should also mention, all of the classes (Input, Processing, and Output) are all Inner classes contained within a Main class that contains the initialise() method and the class level variables mentioned in the main thread code listed below.
Main thread:
static volatile boolean readerFinished = false; // class level variables
static volatile boolean writerFinished = false;
private void initialise() throws IOException {
BlockingQueue<String> inputQueue = new LinkedBlockingQueue<>(1_000_000);
BlockingQueue<String> outputQueue = new LinkedBlockingQueue<>(1_000_000); // capacity 1 million.
String inputFileName = "test.txt";
String outputFileName = "outputTest.txt";
BufferedReader reader = new BufferedReader(new FileReader(inputFileName));
BufferedWriter writer = new BufferedWriter(new FileWriter(outputFileName));
Thread T1 = new Thread(new Input(reader, inputQueue));
Thread T2 = new Thread(new Processing(inputQueue, outputQueue));
Thread T3 = new Thread(new Output(writer, outputQueue));
T1.start();
T2.start();
T3.start();
while (!writerFinished) {
try {
Thread.sleep(1000);
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
reader.close();
writer.close();
System.out.println("Exited.");
}
Input thread: (Please forgive the commented debug code, was using it to ensure the reader thread was actually executing properly).
class Input implements Runnable {
BufferedReader reader;
BlockingQueue<String> inputQueue;
Input(BufferedReader reader, BlockingQueue<String> inputQueue) {
this.reader = reader;
this.inputQueue = inputQueue;
}
#Override
public void run() {
String poisonPill = "ChH92PU2KYkZUBR";
String line;
//int linesRead = 0;
try {
while ((line = reader.readLine()) != null) {
inputQueue.put(line);
//linesRead++;
/*
if (linesRead == 500_000) {
//batchesRead += 1;
//System.out.println("Batch read");
linesRead = 0;
}
*/
}
inputQueue.put(poisonPill);
} catch (IOException | InterruptedException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
readerFinished = true;
}
}
Processing thread: (Normally this would actually be doing something to the line, but for purposes of the mockup I've just made it immediately push to the output thread). If necessary we can simulate it doing some work by making the thread sleep for a small amount of time for each line.
class Processing implements Runnable {
BlockingQueue<String> inputQueue;
BlockingQueue<String> outputQueue;
Processing(BlockingQueue<String> inputQueue, BlockingQueue<String> outputQueue) {
this.inputQueue = inputQueue;
this.outputQueue = outputQueue;
}
#Override
public void run() {
while (true) {
try {
if (inputQueue.isEmpty() && readerFinished) {
break;
}
String line = inputQueue.take();
outputQueue.put(line);
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
}
}
Output thread:
class Output implements Runnable {
BufferedWriter writer;
BlockingQueue<String> outputQueue;
Output(BufferedWriter writer, BlockingQueue<String> outputQueue) {
this.writer = writer;
this.outputQueue = outputQueue;
}
#Override
public void run() {
String line;
ArrayList<String> outputList = new ArrayList<>();
while (true) {
try {
line = outputQueue.take();
if (line.equals("ChH92PU2KYkZUBR")) {
for (String outputLine : outputList) {
writer.write(outputLine);
}
System.out.println("Writer finished - executing termination");
writerFinished = true;
break;
}
line += "\n";
outputList.add(line);
if (outputList.size() == 500_000) {
for (String outputLine : outputList) {
writer.write(outputLine);
}
System.out.println("Writer wrote batch");
outputList = new ArrayList<>();
}
} catch (IOException | InterruptedException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
}
}
So right now the general data flow is very linear, looking something like this:
Input > Processing > Output.
But what I'd like to have is something like this:
But the catch is, when the data gets to output, it either needs to be sorted into the correct order, or it needs to already be in the correct order.
Recommendations or examples on how to go about this would be greatly appreciated.
In the past I have used the Future and Callable interfaces to solve a task involving parallel data flows like this, but unfortunately that code was not reading from a single queue, and so is of minimal help here.
I should also add, for those of you that will notice this, batchSize and poisonPill are normally defined in the main thread and then passed around via variables, they are not usually hard coded as they are in the code for Input thread, and the output checks for the writer thread. I was just a wee bit lazy when writing the mockup for experimentation at ~1am.
Edit: I should also mention, this is required to use Java 8 at most. Java 9 features and above cannot be used due to these versions not being installed in the environments in which this program will be run.

What you could do:
Take X threads for processing, where X is the number of cores available for processing
Give each thread its own input queue.
The reader thread gives records to each thread's input queue round-robin in a predictable fashion.
Since the output files are too big for memory, you write X output files, one for each thread, and each file name has the index of the thread in it, so that you can reconstitute the original order from the file names.
After the process is complete, you merge the X output files. One line from the file for thread 1, one from the files for thread 2, etc. in a round-robin fashion again. This reconstitutes the original order.
As an added bonus, since you have an input queue per thread, you don't have lock contention on the queue between readers. (only between the reader and the writer) You could even optimize this by putting things in the input queues in batches larger than 1.

As was also proposed by Alexei, you can create OrderedTask:
class OrderedTask implements Comparable<OrderedTask> {
private final Integer index;
private final String line;
public OrderedTask(Integer index, String line) {
this.index = index;
this.line = line;
}
#Override
public int compareTo(OrderedTask o) {
return index < o.getIndex() ? -1 : index == o.getIndex() ? 0 : 1;
}
public Integer getIndex() {
return index;
}
public String getLine() {
return line;
}
}
As an output queue you can use your own backed by priority queue:
class OrderedTaskQueue {
private final ReentrantLock lock;
private final Condition waitForOrderedItem;
private final int maxQueuesize;
private final PriorityQueue<OrderedTask> backedQueue;
private int expectedIndex;
public OrderedTaskQueue(int maxQueueSize, int startIndex) {
this.maxQueuesize = maxQueueSize;
this.expectedIndex = startIndex;
this.backedQueue = new PriorityQueue<>(2 * this.maxQueuesize);
this.lock = new ReentrantLock();
this.waitForOrderedItem = this.lock.newCondition();
}
public boolean put(OrderedTask item) {
ReentrantLock lock = this.lock;
lock.lock();
try {
while (this.backedQueue.size() >= maxQueuesize && item.getIndex() != expectedIndex) {
this.waitForOrderedItem.await();
}
boolean result = this.backedQueue.add(item);
this.waitForOrderedItem.signalAll();
return result;
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
throw new RuntimeException();
} finally {
lock.unlock();
}
}
public OrderedTask take() {
ReentrantLock lock = this.lock;
lock.lock();
try {
while (this.backedQueue.peek() == null || this.backedQueue.peek().getIndex() != expectedIndex) {
this.waitForOrderedItem.await();
}
OrderedTask result = this.backedQueue.poll();
expectedIndex++;
this.waitForOrderedItem.signalAll();
return result;
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
throw new RuntimeException();
} finally {
lock.unlock();
}
}
}
StartIndex is the index of the first ordered task, and
maxQueueSize is used to stop processing of other tasks (not to fill the memory), when we wait for some earlier task to finish. It should be double/tripple of the number of processing thread, to not stop the processing immediatelly and allow the scalability.
Then you should create your task :
int indexOrder =0;
while ((line = reader.readLine()) != null) {
inputQueue.put(new OrderedTask(indexOrder++,line);
}
The line by line is only used because of your example. You should change the OrderedTask to support the batch of lines.

Why not reverse the flow ?
Output call for X batches;
Generate X promise/task (promise pattern) who will call randomly one of the processing core (keep a batch number, to pass through to the input core); batch the calls handler into a ordered list;
Each processing core call for a batch in the input core;
Enjoy ?

Using a threadpool to add in to a list

I am trying to read a file and add each line to a list.
Simple drawing explaining the goal
Main class -
public class SimpleTreadPoolMain {
public static void main(String[] args) {
ReadFile reader = new ReadFile();
File file = new File("C:\\myFile.csv");
try {
reader.readFile(file);
} catch (IOException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
}
}
Reader class -
public class ReadFile {
ExecutorService executor = Executors.newFixedThreadPool(5);//creating a pool of 5 threads
List<String> list = new ArrayList<>();
void readFile(File file) throws IOException {
try (BufferedReader br = new BufferedReader(new FileReader(file))) {
String line;
while ((line = br.readLine()) != "") {
Runnable saver = new SaveToList(line,list);
executor.execute(saver);//calling execute method of ExecutorService
}
}
executor.shutdown();
while (!executor.isTerminated()) { }
}
}
Saver class -
public class SaveToList<E> implements Runnable{
List<E> myList;
E line;
public SaveToList(E line, List<E> list) {
this.line = line;
this.myList = list;
}
public void run() {
//modify the line
myList.add(line);
}
}
I tried to have many saver threads to add in to a same list instead of one saver adding to the list one by one. I want to use threads because I need to modify the data before adding to the list. So I assume modifying the data would take up some time. So paralleling this part would reduce the time consumption, right?
But this doesn't work. I am unable to return a global list which includes all the values from the file. I want to have only one global list of values from the file. So the code definitely should change. If one can guide me it would be greatly appreciated.
Even though adding one by one in a single thread would work, using a thread pool would make it faster, right?

Using multiple threads won't speed anything up here.
You are:
Reading a line from a file, serially.
Creating a runnable and submitting it into a thread pool
The runnable then adds things into a list
Given that you're using an ArrayList, you need to synchronize access to it, because you're mutating it from multiple threads. So, you are adding things into the list serially.
But even without the synchronization, the time taken for the IO will far exceed the time taken to add the string into the list. And adding in multithreading is just going to slow it down more, because it's doing work to construct the runnable, submit it to the thread pool, schedule it, etc.
It's simpler just to miss out the whole middle step:
Read a line from a file, serially.
Add the list to the list, serially.
So:
try (BufferedReader br = new BufferedReader(new FileReader(file))) {
String line;
while (!(line = br.readLine()).isEmpty()) {
list.add(line);
}
}

You should in fact try if it's worth using multi threading in you application, just compare how much time it takes to read the whole file without any processing on rows done, and compare it with the time it takes to process serially the whole file.
If your process is not too complex my guess is it is not worth to use multi threading.
If you find that the time it takes is much more then you can think about using one or more threads to do the computations.
If so, you could use Futures to process batches of input strings or maybe you could use a thread safe Queue to send string to another process.
private static final int BATCH_SIZE = 1000;
public static void main(String[] args) throws IOException {
BufferedReader reader = new BufferedReader(new InputStreamReader(new FileInputStream("big_file.csv"), "utf-8"));
ExecutorService pool = Executors.newFixedThreadPool(8);
String line;
List<String> batch = new ArrayList<>(BATCH_SIZE);
List<Future> results = new LinkedList<>();
while((line=reader.readLine())!=null){
batch.add(line);
if(batch.size()>=BATCH_SIZE){
Future<Object> f = noWaitExec(batch, pool);
results.add(f);
batch = new ArrayList<>(BATCH_SIZE);
}
}
Future<List> f = noWaitExec(batch,pool);
results.add(f);
for (Future future : results) {
try {
Object object = future.get();
// Use your results here
} catch (Exception e) {
// Manage this....
}
}
}
private static Future<List> noWaitExec(final List<String> batch, ExecutorService pool) {
return pool.submit(new Callable<List>() {
public List call() throws Exception {
List result = new ArrayList<>(batch.size());
for (String string : batch) {
result.add(process(string));
}
return result;
}
});
}
private static Object process(String string) {
// Your process ....
return null;
};
There are many other possible solutions (Observables, ParallelStreams, Pipes, CompletableFutures ... you name it), still I think that most of the time spent is the time it takes to read the file, just using a BufferedInputStream to read the file with a big enough buffer could cut your times more then parallel computing.

Multiple threads reading from same file/odd behavior

I'm writing a program that needs to read lines from a very large file (400K+ lines) and send the data in each line on to a web service. I decided to try threading and am seeing some behavior I did not expect, it appears like my BufferedReader starts reusing lines it's already given me when I call readline() on it.
My program is made up of two classes. A "Main" class that kicks off the threads and holds a static reference to the BufferedReader and has a static sychronized "readNextLine()" method that the threads can use to basically call readLine() on the BufferedReder. And the "Runnable" class that calls readNextLine() and makes a webservice call with the data from each readNextLine() call. I made the BufferedReader and readNextLine() static just because that's the only way I could think of for the threads to share the reader aside from passing an instance of my main class into the threads, I wasn't sure which was better.
After about 5 minutes, I start seeing errors in my web service saying that it's processing a line it's already processed. I'm able to verify lines are indeed being sent multiple times, minutes apart.
Does anyone have any ideas as to why the BufferedReader seems to be giving the threads lines it already read? I was under the impression readline() was sequential and all I needed to do was make sure the calls to readline() were synchronized.
I'll show some of the Main class code below. The runnable is essentially a while loop that calls readNextLine() and processes each line until there are no more lines left.
Main class:
//showing reader and thread creation
inputStream = sftp.get(path to file);
reader = new BufferedReader(new InputStreamReader(inputStream));
ExecutorService executor = Executors.newFixedThreadPool(threads);
Collection<Future> futures = new ArrayList<Future>();
for(int i=0;i<threads;i++){
MyRunnable runnable = new MyRunnable(i);
futures.add(executor.submit(runnable));
}
LOGGER.debug("futures.get()");
for(Future f:futures){
f.get(); //use to wait until all threads are done
}
public synchronized static String readNextLine(){
String results = null;
try{
if(reader!=null){
results = reader.readLine();
}
}catch(Exception e){
LOGGER.error("Error reading from file");
}
return results;
}

I'm testing what you said, but I found you get an error logic in your readNextLine() method, how can reader.readLine() be invoked as the results is null and the if condition is it is not null?
Now I finished my demo, and it seems it works well, the following is the demo, no re-read line happened:
static BufferedReader reader;
public static void main(String[] args) throws FileNotFoundException, ExecutionException, InterruptedException {
reader = new BufferedReader(new FileReader("test.txt"));
ExecutorService service = Executors.newFixedThreadPool(3);
List<Future> results = new ArrayList<Future>();
for (int i = 0; i < 3; i++) {
results.add(service.submit(new Runnable() {
#Override
public void run() {
try {
String line = null;
while ((line = readNextLine()) != null) {
System.out.println(line);
}
} catch (IOException e) {
e.printStackTrace(); //To change body of catch statement use File | Settings | File Templates.
}
}
}));
}
}
public synchronized static String readNextLine() throws IOException {
return reader.readLine();
}

Threading in Java for files

I am looking to read the contents of a file in Java. I have about 8000 files to read the contents and have it in HashMap like (path,contents). I think using Threads would be a option for doing this to speed up the process.
From what I know having all 8000 files to read their contents in different threads is not possible(we may want to limit the threads),Any comments on it? Also I am new to threading in Java, can any one help on how to get started on this one?
so far I thought this pesudo code, :
public class ThreadingTest extends Thread {
public HashMap<String, String > contents = new HashMap<String, String>();
public ThreadingTest(ArrayList<String> paths)
{
for(String s : paths)
{
// paths is paths to files.
// Have threading here for each path going to get contents from a
// file
//Not sure how to limit and start threads here
readFile(s);
Thread t = new Thread();
t.start();
}
}
public String readFile(String path) throws IOException
{
FileReader reader = new FileReader(path);
StringBuilder sb = new StringBuilder();
BufferedReader br = new BufferedReader(reader);
String line;
while ( (line=br.readLine()) != null) {
sb.append(line);
}
return textOnly;
}
}
Any help in completing the threading process. Thanks

Short answer: Read the files sequentially. Disk I/O doesn't parallelize well.
Long Answer: Threading might improve the read performance if the disks are good at random access (SSD disks are) or if the files are placed on several different disks, but if they're not you're just likely to end up with a lot of cache misses and waiting for the disks to seek the right read position. (You may still end up there even if your disks are good at random access.)
If you want to measure instead of guess, use Executors.newFixedThreadPool to create an ExecutorService which can read your files in parallell. Experiment with different thread counts, but don't be surprised if one reader thread per physical disk gives you the best performance.

This is a typical task for thread pool. See the tutorial here: http://download.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/essential/concurrency/pools.html

import java.io.*;
import java.util.Collections;
import java.util.HashMap;
import java.util.Map;
import java.util.concurrent.*;
public class PooledFileProcessing {
private Map<String, String> contents = Collections.synchronizedMap(new HashMap<String, String>());
// Integer.MAX_VALUE items max
private LinkedBlockingQueue<Runnable> workQueue = new LinkedBlockingQueue<Runnable>();
private ExecutorService executor = new ThreadPoolExecutor(
5, // five workers by default
20, // up to twenty workers
1, TimeUnit.MINUTES, // idle thread dies in one minute
workQueue
);
public void process(final String basePath) {
visit(new File(basePath));
System.out.println(workQueue.size() + " jobs still in queue");
executor.shutdown();
try {
executor.awaitTermination(5, TimeUnit.MINUTES);
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
System.out.println("interrupted while awaiting termination");
}
System.out.println(contents.size() + " files indexed");
}
public void visit(final File file) {
if (!file.exists()) {
return;
}
if (file.isFile()) { // skip the dirs
executor.submit(new RunnablePullFile(file));
}
// traverse children
if (file.isDirectory()) {
final File[] children = file.listFiles();
if (children != null && children.length > 0) {
for (File child : children) {
visit(child);
}
}
}
}
public static void main(String[] args) {
new PooledFileProcessing().process(args.length == 1 ? args[0] : System.getProperty("user.home"));
}
protected class RunnablePullFile implements Runnable {
private final File file;
public RunnablePullFile(File file) {
this.file = file;
}
public void run() {
BufferedReader reader = null;
try {
reader = new BufferedReader(new FileReader(file));
StringBuilder sb = new StringBuilder();
String line;
while (
(line=reader.readLine()) != null &&
sb.length() < 8192 /* remove this check for a nice OOME or swap thrashing */
) {
sb.append(line);
}
contents.put(file.getPath(), sb.toString());
} catch (IOException e) {
System.err.println("failed on file: '" + file.getPath() + "': " + e.getMessage());
if (reader != null) {
try {
reader.close();
} catch (IOException e1) {
// ignore that one
}
}
}
}
}
}

From my experience, threading helps - use a thread pool and play with values around 1..2 threads per core.
Just take care with the hash map - consider putting data to the map via a synchronized method only. I remember I once had some ugly issues in similiar project and they were related to concurrent modifications of a central hash map.

just some quick tips.
First of all, to get you started on threads, you should just look at the Runnable interface, or the Thread class. To make a thread you either have to implement this interface with a class or extend this class with another class. You can also make anonymous threads too, but I dislike the readability of those unless its something SUPER simple.
Next, just some notes on processing text with multiple threads, because it just so happens I have some experience in exactly this! Keep in mind that if the files are large and take a noticeably long time to process a single file that you will want to monitor your CPU. In my experience I was doing lots of calculations and lookups when I was processing which added hugely to my load so in the end I found that I could only make as many threads as I had processors because each thread was so labor intensive. So keep that in mind, you want to monitor the effect each thread has on the processor.

I'm not sure having threads for this would really speed up the process if all the files are on the same physical disk. It could even slow things down because the disk would have to constantly switch from one location to the other.