This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub, and is currently read-only.
For more information, see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.

Author vstinner
Recipients jcea, pitrou, vstinner
Date 2011-05-30.11:57:29
SpamBayes Score 1.0696461e-07
Marked as misclassified No
Message-id <1306756651.54.0.607962084751.issue12213@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content
io_interlaced_read_write.patch:
 - add interlaced read/write tests for BufferedRandom and BufferedRWPair
 - _pyio: move "undo readahead" code into BufferedReader.flush()
 - io: BufferedRandom.flush() doesn't undo readahead if the write buffer is empty, so it's possible to call it in read methods without flusing the readahead buffer when it's not needed
 - read(), read1(), readinto(), peek() calls writer.flush()
 - write() calls reader.flush() (undo readahead)

TODO:
 - tests BufferedRWPair with read-only + write-only files because I'm not sure if my tests using readable and writeable methods
 - _pyio: undo the readahead in BufferedReader.flush() is no perfect, because BufferedReader is supposed to be read-only. I choosed that to factorize the code between BufferedRandom and BufferedRWPair
 - what happens if a write occurs during _pyio.BufferedReader.flush()? "if self._read_buf: <write occurs> with self._read_lock: ...". We may protect the read of self._read_buf with the read lock.

My patch tries to fix interlaced read-write by always calling flush(), but I am not sure that it doesn't change read-only and write-only cases. There are maybe some unnecessary call to flush().
History
Date User Action Args
2011-05-30 11:57:31vstinnersetrecipients: + vstinner, jcea, pitrou
2011-05-30 11:57:31vstinnersetmessageid: <1306756651.54.0.607962084751.issue12213@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2011-05-30 11:57:30vstinnerlinkissue12213 messages
2011-05-30 11:57:30vstinnercreate