New submission from Erik Bray:
In #18876 I pointed out the following issue:
BufferedWriter/Random doesn't know the raw file was opened with O_APPEND so the
writes it shows in the buffer differ from what will actually end up in the
file. For example:
>>> f = open('test', 'wb')
>>> f.write(b'testest')
7
>>> f.close()
>>> f = open('test', 'ab+')
>>> f.tell()
7
>>> f.write(b'A')
1
>>> f.seek(0)
0
>>> f.read()
b'testestA'
>>> f.seek(0)
0
>>> f.read(1)
b't'
>>> f.write(b'B')
1
>>> f.seek(0)
0
>>> f.read()
b'tBstestA'
>>> f.flush()
>>> f.seek(0)
0
>>> f.read()
b'testestAB'
In this example, I read 1 byte from the beginning of the file, then write one
byte. Because of O_APPEND, the effect of the write() call on the raw file is
to append, regardless of where BufferedWriter seeks it to first. But before
the f.flush() call f.read() just shows what's in the buffer which is not what
will actually be written to the file. (Naturally, unbuffered io does not have
this particular problem.)
Now that #18876 we can test if a file was opened in append mode and correct for
this. The attach patch includes a pretty simple solution that manually calls
buffered_seek at the beginning of bufferedwriter_write if the raw file is in
append mode. In doing so it made sense to split buffered_seek into two
separate functions.
This might be overkill, however.
----------
components: IO
files: buffered-append-1.patch
keywords: patch
messages: 207015
nosy: erik.bray
priority: normal
severity: normal
status: open
title: Misbehavior of BufferedRandom.write with raw file in append mode
type: behavior
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file33282/buffered-append-1.patch
_______________________________________
Python tracker <[email protected]>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue20082>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
