I have a computation that along with other things generates some data (a lot of it) and I want to write into a file.
The way the code is structured now is (simplified):
writeRecord :: Handle -> Record -> IO ()
writeRecord h r = hPutStrLn h (toByteString r)
This function is then called periodically during a bigger computation. It is almost like a log, and in fact, multiple files are being written simultaneously.
Now I want the output file to be compressed with Gzip.
In languages like Java I would do something like:
outStream = new GzipOutputStream(new FileOutputStream(path))
and then would just write into that wrapped output stream.
What is the way of doing it in Haskell?
I think writing something like
writeRecord h r = hPut h ((compressed . toByteString) r)
is not correct because compressing each small bit individually isn't efficient (I even tried it and the size of the compressed file is bigger than uncompressed this way).
I also don't think that I can just produce a lazy ByteString (or even a list of chunks) and then write it with compressed . fromChunks because this will require my "generator" building the full thing in memory. And the fact that more than one file is produced at the same time makes it even more complicated.
So what would be a way to solve this in Haskell? Writing to file(s) and have them gzipped?
All the streaming libraries support compression. If I understand the particular problem and the way you are thinking about it, io-streams might be the simplest for your purposes. Here I alternate between writing to trump and clinton output streams, which are written as compressed files. I follow by showing the pipes equivalent of Michael's conduit program
#!/usr/bin/env stack
-- stack --resolver lts-6.21 --install-ghc runghc --package io-streams
{-# LANGUAGE OverloadedStrings #-}
import qualified System.IO.Streams as IOS
import qualified System.IO as IO
import Data.ByteString (ByteString)
analyzer :: IOS.OutputStream ByteString -> IOS.OutputStream ByteString -> IO ()
analyzer clinton trump = do
IOS.write (Just "This is a string\n") clinton
IOS.write (Just "This is a string\n") trump
IOS.write (Just "Clinton string\n") clinton
IOS.write (Just "Trump string\n") trump
IOS.write (Just "Another Clinton string\n") clinton
IOS.write (Just "Another Trump string\n") trump
IOS.write Nothing clinton
IOS.write Nothing trump
main:: IO ()
main =
IOS.withFileAsOutput "some-file-clinton.txt.gz" $ \clinton_compressed ->
IOS.withFileAsOutput "some-file-trump.txt.gz" $ \trump_compressed -> do
clinton <- IOS.gzip IOS.defaultCompressionLevel clinton_compressed
trump <- IOS.gzip IOS.defaultCompressionLevel trump_compressed
analyzer clinton trump
Obviously you can mix all kinds of IO in analyzer between acts of writing to the two output streams - I'm just show in the writes, so to speak. In particular, if analyzer is understood as depending on an input stream, the writes can depend on reads from the input stream. Here's a (slightly!) more complicated program that does that. If I run the program above I see
$ stack gzip_so.hs
$ gunzip some-file-clinton.txt.gz
$ gunzip some-file-trump.txt.gz
$ cat some-file-clinton.txt
This is a string
Clinton string
Another Clinton string
$ cat some-file-trump.txt
This is a string
Trump string
Another Trump string
With pipes and conduit there are various ways of achieving the above effect, with a higher level of decomposition of parts. Writing to separate files will however be a little more subtle. Here in any case is the pipes equivalent of Michael S's conduit program:
#!/usr/bin/env stack
-- stack --resolver lts-6.21 --install-ghc runghc --package pipes-zlib
{-# LANGUAGE OverloadedStrings #-}
import Control.Monad.IO.Class (MonadIO, liftIO)
import Data.ByteString (ByteString, hPutStr)
import System.IO (IOMode(..), withFile, Handle)
import Pipes
import qualified Pipes.ByteString as PB
import qualified Pipes.GZip as P
-- Some helper function you may have
someAction :: IO ByteString
someAction = return "This is a string\n"
-- Original version
producerHandle :: Handle -> IO ()
producerHandle h = do
str <- someAction
hPutStr h str
producerPipe :: MonadIO m => Producer ByteString m ()
producerPipe = do
str <- liftIO someAction
yield str
main :: IO ()
main = withFile "some-file-pipes.txt.gz" WriteMode $ \h ->
runEffect $ P.compress P.defaultCompression producerPipe >-> PB.toHandle h
-- Edit
Here for what it's worth is yet another way of superimposing several producers on a single thread with pipes or conduit, to add to the different approaches Michael S and danidiaz mentioned:
#!/usr/bin/env stack
-- stack --resolver lts-6.21 --install-ghc runghc --package pipes-zlib
{-# LANGUAGE OverloadedStrings #-}
import Pipes
import Pipes.GZip
import qualified Pipes.Prelude as P
import qualified Pipes.ByteString as Bytes
import System.IO
import Control.Monad (replicateM_)
producer = replicateM_ 50000 $ do
marie "This is going to Marie\n" -- arbitary IO can be interspersed here
arthur "This is going to Arthur\n" -- with liftIO
sylvia "This is going to Sylvia\n"
where
marie = yield; arthur = lift . yield; sylvia = lift . lift . yield
sinkHelper h p = runEffect (compress bestSpeed p >-> Bytes.toHandle h)
main :: IO ()
main =
withFile "marie.txt.gz" WriteMode $ \marie ->
withFile "arthur.txt.gz" WriteMode $ \arthur ->
withFile "sylvia.txt.gz" WriteMode $ \sylvia ->
sinkHelper sylvia
$ sinkHelper arthur
$ sinkHelper marie
$ producer
It is quite simple and fast, and can be written in conduit with the obvious alterations - but finding it natural involves a higher level of buy-in with the 'monad transformer stack' point of view. It would be the most natural way of writing such a program from the point of view of something like the streaming library.
Doing this with conduit is fairly straightforward, though you'd need to adjust your code a bit. I've put together an example of before and after code to demonstrate it. The basic idea is:
Replace hPutStr h with yield
Add some liftIO wrappers
Instead of using withBinaryFile or the like, use runConduitRes, gzip, and sinkFile
Here's the example:
#!/usr/bin/env stack
-- stack --resolver lts-6.21 --install-ghc runghc --package conduit-extra
{-# LANGUAGE OverloadedStrings #-}
import Control.Monad.IO.Class (MonadIO, liftIO)
import Data.ByteString (ByteString, hPutStr)
import Data.Conduit (ConduitM, (.|), yield, runConduitRes)
import Data.Conduit.Binary (sinkFile)
import Data.Conduit.Zlib (gzip)
import System.IO (Handle)
-- Some helper function you may have
someAction :: IO ByteString
someAction = return "This is a string\n"
-- Original version
producerHandle :: Handle -> IO ()
producerHandle h = do
str <- someAction
hPutStr h str
-- Conduit version
producerConduit :: MonadIO m => ConduitM i ByteString m ()
producerConduit = do
str <- liftIO someAction
yield str
main :: IO ()
main = runConduitRes $ producerConduit
.| gzip
.| sinkFile "some-file.txt.gz"
You can learn more about conduit in the conduit tutorial.
Your Java idea is interesting, give me a few more minutes, I'll add an answer that looks more like that.
EDIT
Here's a version that's closer to your Java style approach. It relies on a SinkFunc.hs module which is available as a Gist at: https://gist.github.com/snoyberg/283154123d30ff9e201ea4436a5dd22d
#!/usr/bin/env stack
-- stack --resolver lts-6.21 --install-ghc runghc --package conduit-extra
{-# LANGUAGE OverloadedStrings #-}
{-# OPTIONS_GHC -Wall -Werror #-}
import Data.ByteString (ByteString)
import Data.Conduit ((.|))
import Data.Conduit.Binary (sinkHandle)
import Data.Conduit.Zlib (gzip)
import System.IO (withBinaryFile, IOMode (WriteMode))
import SinkFunc (withSinkFunc)
-- Some helper function you may have
someAction :: IO ByteString
someAction = return "This is a string\n"
producerFunc :: (ByteString -> IO ()) -> IO ()
producerFunc write = do
str <- someAction
write str
main :: IO ()
main = withBinaryFile "some-file.txt.gz" WriteMode $ \h -> do
let sink = gzip .| sinkHandle h
withSinkFunc sink $ \write -> producerFunc write
EDIT 2 One more for good measure, actually using ZipSink to stream the data to multiple different files. There are lots of different ways of slicing this, but this is one way that works:
#!/usr/bin/env stack
-- stack --resolver lts-6.21 --install-ghc runghc --package conduit-extra
{-# LANGUAGE OverloadedStrings #-}
import Control.Monad.Trans.Resource (MonadResource)
import Data.ByteString (ByteString)
import Data.Conduit (ConduitM, (.|), yield, runConduitRes, ZipSink (..))
import Data.Conduit.Binary (sinkFile)
import qualified Data.Conduit.List as CL
import Data.Conduit.Zlib (gzip)
data Output = Foo ByteString | Bar ByteString
fromFoo :: Output -> Maybe ByteString
fromFoo (Foo bs) = Just bs
fromFoo _ = Nothing
fromBar :: Output -> Maybe ByteString
fromBar (Bar bs) = Just bs
fromBar _ = Nothing
producer :: Monad m => ConduitM i Output m ()
producer = do
yield $ Foo "This is going to Foo"
yield $ Bar "This is going to Bar"
sinkHelper :: MonadResource m
=> FilePath
-> (Output -> Maybe ByteString)
-> ConduitM Output o m ()
sinkHelper fp f
= CL.mapMaybe f
.| gzip
.| sinkFile fp
main :: IO ()
main = runConduitRes
$ producer
.| getZipSink
(ZipSink (sinkHelper "foo.txt.gz" fromFoo) *>
ZipSink (sinkHelper "bar.txt.gz" fromBar))
For incremental compression, I think you could make use of compressIO/foldCompressStream in Codec.Compression.Zlib.Internal.
If you're able to represent your producer action as an IO (Maybe a) (such as an MVar take or InputStream/Chan read) where Nothing signifies end of input, something like this should work:
import System.IO (Handle)
import qualified Data.ByteString as BS
import qualified Codec.Compression.Zlib.Internal as ZLib
compressedWriter :: Handle -> (IO (Maybe BS.ByteString)) -> IO ()
compressedWriter handle source =
ZLib.foldCompressStream
(\next -> source >>= maybe (next BS.empty) next)
(\chunk next -> BS.hPut handle chunk >> next)
(return ())
(ZLib.compressIO ZLib.rawFormat ZLib.defaultCompressParams)
This solution is similar to Michael Snoyman's EDIT 2, but uses the foldl, pipes, pipes-zlib and streaming-eversion packages.
{-# language OverloadedStrings #-}
module Main where
-- cabal install bytestring foldl pipes pipes-zlib streaming-eversion
import Data.Foldable
import Data.ByteString
import qualified Control.Foldl as L
import Pipes
import qualified Pipes.Prelude
import Pipes.Zlib (compress,defaultCompression,defaultWindowBits)
import Streaming.Eversion.Pipes (transvertMIO)
import System.IO
type Tag = String
producer :: Monad m => Producer (Tag,ByteString) m ()
producer = do
yield $ ("foo","This is going to Foo")
yield $ ("bar","This is going to Bar")
foldForTag :: Handle -> Tag -> L.FoldM IO (Tag,ByteString) ()
foldForTag handle tag =
L.premapM (\(tag',bytes) -> if tag' == tag then Just bytes else Nothing)
. L.handlesM L.folded
. transvertMIO (compress defaultCompression defaultWindowBits)
$ L.mapM_ (Data.ByteString.hPut handle)
main :: IO ()
main = do
withFile "foo.txt" WriteMode $ \h1 ->
withFile "bar.txt" WriteMode $ \h2 ->
let multifold = traverse_ (uncurry foldForTag) [(h1,"foo"),(h2,"bar")]
in L.impurely Pipes.Prelude.foldM multifold producer
This solution is similar to Michael Snoyman's EDIT 2, but uses the streaming, streaming-bytestring, pipes and pipes-zlib packages.
{-# language OverloadedStrings #-}
module Main where
-- cabal install bytestring streaming streaming-bytestring pipes pipes-zlib
import Data.ByteString
import qualified Data.ByteString.Streaming as B
import Streaming
import qualified Streaming.Prelude as S
import Pipes (next)
import qualified Pipes.Prelude
import Pipes.Zlib (compress,defaultCompression,defaultWindowBits)
import System.IO
type Tag = String
producer :: Monad m => Stream (Of (Tag,ByteString)) m ()
producer = do
S.yield ("foo","This is going to Foo")
S.yield ("bar","This is going to Bar")
-- I couldn't find a streaming-zlib on Hackage, took a pipes detour
compress' :: MonadIO m
=> Stream (Of ByteString) m r -> Stream (Of ByteString) m r
compress' = S.unfoldr Pipes.next
. compress defaultCompression defaultWindowBits
. Pipes.Prelude.unfoldr S.next
keepTag :: Monad m
=> Tag -> Stream (Of (Tag,ByteString)) m r -> Stream (Of ByteString) m r
keepTag tag = S.map snd . S.filter ((tag==) . fst)
main :: IO ()
main = runResourceT
. B.writeFile "foo.txt" . B.fromChunks . compress' . keepTag "foo"
. B.writeFile "bar.txt" . B.fromChunks . compress' . keepTag "bar"
$ S.copy producer
I make use of the copy function from Streaming.Prelude, that allows you to
Duplicate the content of stream, so that it can be acted on twice in
different ways, but without breaking streaming.
Related
While writing a deserialiser for a large (<bloblength><blob>)* encoded binary file I got stuck with the various Haskell produce-transform-consume libraries. So far I'm aware of four streaming libraries:
Data.Conduit: Widely used, has very careful resource management
Pipes: Similar to conduit (Haskell Cast #6 nicely reveals the differences between conduit and pipes)
Data.Binary.Get: Offers useful functions such as getWord32be, but the streaming example is awkward
System.IO.Streams: Seems to be the easiest one to use
Here's a stripped down example of where things go wrong when I try to do Word32 streaming with conduit. A slightly more realistic example would first read a Word32 that determines the blob length and then yield a lazy ByteString of that length (which is then deserialised further).
But here I just try to extract Word32's in streaming fashion from a binary file:
module Main where
-- build-depends: bytestring, conduit, conduit-extra, resourcet, binary
import Control.Monad.Trans.Resource (MonadResource, runResourceT)
import qualified Data.Binary.Get as G
import qualified Data.ByteString as BS
import qualified Data.ByteString.Char8 as C
import qualified Data.ByteString.Lazy as BL
import Data.Conduit
import qualified Data.Conduit.Binary as CB
import qualified Data.Conduit.List as CL
import Data.Word (Word32)
import System.Environment (getArgs)
-- gets a Word32 from a ByteString.
getWord32 :: C.ByteString -> Word32
getWord32 bs = do
G.runGet G.getWord32be $ BL.fromStrict bs
-- should read BytesString and return Word32
transform :: (Monad m, MonadResource m) => Conduit BS.ByteString m Word32
transform = do
mbs <- await
case mbs of
Just bs -> do
case C.null bs of
False -> do
yield $ getWord32 bs
leftover $ BS.drop 4 bs
transform
True -> return ()
Nothing -> return ()
main :: IO ()
main = do
filename <- fmap (!!0) getArgs -- should check length getArgs
result <- runResourceT $ (CB.sourceFile filename) $$ transform =$ CL.consume
print $ length result -- is always 8188 for files larger than 32752 bytes
The output of the program is just the number of Word32's that were read. It turns out the stream terminates after reading the first chunk (about 32KiB). For some reason mbs is never Nothing, so I must check null bs which stops the stream when the chunk is consumed. Clearly, my conduit transform is faulty. I see two routes to a solution:
The await doesn't want to go to the second chunk of the ByteStream, so is there another function that pulls the next chunk? In examples I've seen (e.g. Conduit 101) this is not how it's done
This is just the wrong way to set up transform.
How is this done properly? Is this the right way to go? (Performance does matter.)
Update: Here's a BAD way to do it using Systems.IO.Streams:
module Main where
import Data.Word (Word32)
import System.Environment (getArgs)
import System.IO (IOMode (ReadMode), openFile)
import qualified System.IO.Streams as S
import System.IO.Streams.Binary (binaryInputStream)
import System.IO.Streams.List (outputToList)
main :: IO ()
main = do
filename : _ <- getArgs
h <- openFile filename ReadMode
s <- S.handleToInputStream h
i <- binaryInputStream s :: IO (S.InputStream Word32)
r <- outputToList $ S.connect i
print $ last r
'Bad' means: Very demanding in time and space, does not handle Decode exception.
Your immediate problem is caused by how you are using leftover. That function is used to "Provide a single piece of leftover input to be consumed by the next component in the current monadic binding", and so when you give it bs before looping with transform you are effectively throwing away the rest of the bytestring (i.e. what is after bs).
A correct solution based on your code would use the incremental input interface of Data.Binary.Get to replace your yield/leftover combination with something that consumes each chunk fully. A more pragmatic approach, though, is using the binary-conduit package, which provides that in the shape of conduitGet (its source gives a good idea of what a "manual" implementation would look like):
import Data.Conduit.Serialization.Binary
-- etc.
transform :: (Monad m, MonadResource m) => Conduit BS.ByteString m Word32
transform = conduitGet G.getWord32be
One caveat is that this will throw a parse error if the total number of bytes is not a multiple of 4 (i.e. the last Word32 is incomplete). In the unlikely case of that not being what you want, a lazy way out would be simply using \bs -> C.take (4 * truncate (C.length bs / 4)) bs on the input bytestring.
With pipes (and pipes-group and pipes-bytestring) the demo problem reduces to combinators. First we resolve the incoming undifferentiated byte stream into little 4 byte chunks:
chunksOfStrict :: (Monad m) => Int -> Producer ByteString m r -> Producer ByteString m r
chunksOfStrict n = folds mappend mempty id . view (Bytes.chunksOf n)
then we map these to Word32s and (here) count them.
main :: IO ()
main = do
filename:_ <- getArgs
IO.withFile filename IO.ReadMode $ \h -> do
n <- P.length $ chunksOfStrict 4 (Bytes.fromHandle h) >-> P.map getWord32
print n
This will fail if we have less than 4 bytes or otherwise fail to parse but we can as well map with
getMaybeWord32 :: ByteString -> Maybe Word32
getMaybeWord32 bs = case G.runGetOrFail G.getWord32be $ BL.fromStrict bs of
Left r -> Nothing
Right (_, off, w32) -> Just w32
The following program will then print the parses for the valid 4 byte sequences
main :: IO ()
main = do
filename:_ <- getArgs
IO.withFile filename IO.ReadMode $ \h -> do
runEffect $ chunksOfStrict 4 (Bytes.fromHandle h)
>-> P.map getMaybeWord32
>-> P.concat -- here `concat` eliminates maybes
>-> P.print
There are other ways of dealing with failed parses, of course.
Here, though, is something closer to the program you asked for. It takes a four byte segment from a byte stream (Producer ByteString m r) and reads it as a Word32 if it is long enough; it then takes that many of the incoming bytes and accumulates them into a lazy bytestring, yielding it. It just repeats this until it runs out of bytes. In main below, I print each yielded lazy bytestring that is produced:
module Main (main) where
import Pipes
import qualified Pipes.Prelude as P
import Pipes.Group (folds)
import qualified Pipes.ByteString as Bytes ( splitAt, fromHandle, chunksOf )
import Control.Lens ( view ) -- or Lens.Simple (view) -- or Lens.Micro ((.^))
import qualified System.IO as IO ( IOMode(ReadMode), withFile )
import qualified Data.Binary.Get as G ( runGet, getWord32be )
import Data.ByteString ( ByteString )
import qualified Data.ByteString.Lazy.Char8 as BL
import System.Environment ( getArgs )
splitLazy :: (Monad m, Integral n) =>
n -> Producer ByteString m r -> m (BL.ByteString, Producer ByteString m r)
splitLazy n bs = do
(bss, rest) <- P.toListM' $ view (Bytes.splitAt n) bs
return (BL.fromChunks bss, rest)
measureChunks :: Monad m => Producer ByteString m r -> Producer BL.ByteString m r
measureChunks bs = do
(lbs, rest) <- lift $ splitLazy 4 bs
if BL.length lbs /= 4
then rest >-> P.drain -- in fact it will be empty
else do
let w32 = G.runGet G.getWord32be lbs
(lbs', rest') <- lift $ splitLazy w32 bs
yield lbs
measureChunks rest
main :: IO ()
main = do
filename:_ <- getArgs
IO.withFile filename IO.ReadMode $ \h -> do
runEffect $ measureChunks (Bytes.fromHandle h) >-> P.print
This is again crude in that it uses runGet not runGetOrFail, but this is easily repaired. The pipes standard procedure would be to stop the stream transformation on a failed parse and return the unparsed bytestream.
If you were anticipating that the Word32s were for large numbers, so that you did not want to accumulate the corresponding stream of bytes as a lazy bytestring, but say write them to different files without accumulating, we could change the program pretty easily to do that. This would require a sophisticated use of conduit but is the preferred approach with pipes and streaming.
Here's a relatively straightforward solution that I want to throw into the ring. It's a repeated use of splitAt wrapped into a State monad that gives an interface identical to (a subset of) Data.Binary.Get. The resulting [ByteString] is obtained in main with a whileJust over getBlob.
module Main (main) where
import Control.Monad.Loops
import Control.Monad.State
import qualified Data.Binary.Get as G (getWord32be, runGet)
import qualified Data.ByteString.Lazy as BL
import Data.Int (Int64)
import Data.Word (Word32)
import System.Environment (getArgs)
-- this is going to mimic the Data.Binary.Get.Get Monad
type Get = State BL.ByteString
getWord32be :: Get (Maybe Word32)
getWord32be = state $ \bs -> do
let (w, rest) = BL.splitAt 4 bs
case BL.length w of
4 -> (Just w', rest) where
w' = G.runGet G.getWord32be w
_ -> (Nothing, BL.empty)
getLazyByteString :: Int64 -> Get BL.ByteString
getLazyByteString n = state $ \bs -> BL.splitAt n bs
getBlob :: Get (Maybe BL.ByteString)
getBlob = do
ml <- getWord32be
case ml of
Nothing -> return Nothing
Just l -> do
blob <- getLazyByteString (fromIntegral l :: Int64)
return $ Just blob
runGet :: Get a -> BL.ByteString -> a
runGet g bs = fst $ runState g bs
main :: IO ()
main = do
fname <- head <$> getArgs
bs <- BL.readFile fname
let ls = runGet loop bs where
loop = whileJust getBlob return
print $ length ls
There's no error handling in getBlob, but it's easy to extend. Time and space complexity is quite good, as long as the resulting list is used carefully. (The python script that creates some random data for consumption by the above is here).
This is a followup to this earlier question. I have a conduit source (from Network.HTTP.Conduit) which is strict ByteString. I will like to recombine them into larger chunks (to send over network to another client, after another encoding and conversion to lazy bytestring). I wrote chunksOfAtLeast conduit, derived from the answer in above question which seems to work pretty well. I am wondering if there is any further scope for improving it performance-wise.
import Data.Conduit as C
import Control.Monad.IO.Class
import Control.Monad
import Data.Conduit.Combinators as CC
import Data.Conduit.List as CL
import Data.ByteString.Lazy as LBS hiding (putStrLn)
import Data.ByteString as BS hiding (putStrLn)
chunksOfAtLeast :: Monad m => Int -> Conduit BS.ByteString m BS.ByteString
chunksOfAtLeast chunkSize =
loop
where
loop = do
bs <- takeE chunkSize =$= ((BS.concat . ($ [])) <$> CL.fold (\front next -> front . (next:)) id)
unless (BS.null bs) $ do
yield bs
loop
main = do
yieldMany ["hello", "there", "world!"] $$ chunksOfAtLeast 8 =$ CL.mapM_ Prelude.print
Getting optimal performance is always a case of trying something and benchmarking it, so I can't tell you with certainty that I'm offering you something more efficient. That said, combining smaller chunks of data into larger chunks is a primary goal of builders, so leveraging them may be more efficient. Here's an example:
{-# LANGUAGE OverloadedStrings #-}
import Conduit
import Data.ByteString (ByteString)
import Data.ByteString.Builder (byteString)
import Data.Conduit.ByteString.Builder
bufferChunks :: Conduit ByteString IO ByteString
bufferChunks = mapC byteString =$= builderToByteString
main :: IO ()
main = yieldMany ["hello", "there", "world!"] $$ bufferChunks =$ mapM_C print
I want to extract information from a large XML file (around 20G) in Haskell. Since it is a large file, I used SAX parsing functions from Hexpath.
Here is a simple code I tested:
import qualified Data.ByteString.Lazy as L
import Text.XML.Expat.SAX as Sax
parse :: FilePath -> IO ()
parse path = do
inputText <- L.readFile path
let saxEvents = Sax.parse defaultParseOptions inputText :: [SAXEvent Text Text]
let txt = foldl' processEvent "" saxEvents
putStrLn txt
After activating profiling in Cabal, it says that parse.saxEvents took 85% of allocated memory. I also used foldr and the result is the same.
If processEvent becomes complex enough, the program crashes with a stack space overflow error.
What am I doing wrong?
You don't say what processEvent is like. In principle, it ought to be unproblematic to use lazy ByteString for a strict left fold over lazily generated input, so I'm not sure what is going wrong in your case. But one ought to use streaming-appropriate types when dealing with gigantic files!
In fact, hexpat does have 'streaming' interface (just like xml-conduit). It uses the not-too-well known List library and the rather ugly List class it defines. In principle the ListT type from the List package should work well. I gave up quickly because of a lack of combinators, and wrote an appropriate instance of the ugly List class for a wrapped version of Pipes.ListT which I then used to export ordinary Pipes.Producer functions like parseProduce. The trivial manipulations needed for this are appended below as PipesSax.hs
Once we have parseProducer we can convert a ByteString or Text Producer into a Producer of SaxEvents with Text or ByteString components. Here are some simple operations. I was using a 238M "input.xml"; the programs never need more than 6 mb of memory, to judge from looking at top.
-- Sax.hs Most of the IO actions use a registerIds pipe defined at the bottom which is tailored to a giant bit of xml of which this is a valid 1000 fragment http://sprunge.us/WaQK
{-#LANGUAGE OverloadedStrings #-}
import PipesSax ( parseProducer )
import Data.ByteString ( ByteString )
import Text.XML.Expat.SAX
import Pipes -- cabal install pipes pipes-bytestring
import Pipes.ByteString (toHandle, fromHandle, stdin, stdout )
import qualified Pipes.Prelude as P
import qualified System.IO as IO
import qualified Data.ByteString.Char8 as Char8
sax :: MonadIO m => Producer ByteString m ()
-> Producer (SAXEvent ByteString ByteString) m ()
sax = parseProducer defaultParseOptions
-- stream xml from stdin, yielding hexpat tagstream to stdout;
main0 :: IO ()
main0 = runEffect $ sax stdin >-> P.print
-- stream the extracted 'IDs' from stdin to stdout
main1 :: IO ()
main1 = runEffect $ sax stdin >-> registryIds >-> stdout
-- write all IDs to a file
main2 =
IO.withFile "input.xml" IO.ReadMode $ \inp ->
IO.withFile "output.txt" IO.WriteMode $ \out ->
runEffect $ sax (fromHandle inp) >-> registryIds >-> toHandle out
-- folds:
-- print number of IDs
main3 = IO.withFile "input.xml" IO.ReadMode $ \inp ->
do n <- P.length $ sax (fromHandle inp) >-> registryIds
print n
-- sum the meaningful part of the IDs - a dumb fold for illustration
main4 = IO.withFile "input.xml" IO.ReadMode $ \inp ->
do let pipeline = sax (fromHandle inp) >-> registryIds >-> P.map readIntId
n <- P.fold (+) 0 id pipeline
print n
where
readIntId :: ByteString -> Integer
readIntId = maybe 0 (fromIntegral.fst) . Char8.readInt . Char8.drop 2
-- my xml has tags with attributes that appear via hexpat thus:
-- StartElement "FacilitySite" [("registryId","110007915364")]
-- and the like. This is just an arbitrary demo stream manipulation.
registryIds :: Monad m => Pipe (SAXEvent ByteString ByteString) ByteString m ()
registryIds = do
e <- await -- we look for a 'SAXEvent'
case e of -- if it matches, we yield, else we go to the next event
StartElement "FacilitySite" [("registryId",a)] -> do yield a
yield "\n"
registryIds
_ -> registryIds
-- 'library': PipesSax.hs
This just newtypes Pipes.ListT to get the appropriate instances. We don't export anything to do with List or ListT but just use the standard Pipes.Producer concept.
{-#LANGUAGE TypeFamilies, GeneralizedNewtypeDeriving #-}
module PipesSax (parseProducerLocations, parseProducer) where
import Data.ByteString (ByteString)
import Text.XML.Expat.SAX
import Data.List.Class
import Control.Monad
import Control.Applicative
import Pipes
import qualified Pipes.Internal as I
parseProducer
:: (Monad m, GenericXMLString tag, GenericXMLString text)
=> ParseOptions tag text
-> Producer ByteString m ()
-> Producer (SAXEvent tag text) m ()
parseProducer opt = enumerate . enumerate_
. parseG opt
. Select_ . Select
parseProducerLocations
:: (Monad m, GenericXMLString tag, GenericXMLString text)
=> ParseOptions tag text
-> Producer ByteString m ()
-> Producer (SAXEvent tag text, XMLParseLocation) m ()
parseProducerLocations opt =
enumerate . enumerate_ . parseLocationsG opt . Select_ . Select
newtype ListT_ m a = Select_ { enumerate_ :: ListT m a }
deriving (Functor, Monad, MonadPlus, MonadIO
, Applicative, Alternative, Monoid, MonadTrans)
instance Monad m => List (ListT_ m) where
type ItemM (ListT_ m) = m
joinL = Select_ . Select . I.M . liftM (enumerate . enumerate_)
runList = liftM emend . next . enumerate . enumerate_
where
emend (Right (a,q)) = Cons a (Select_ (Select q))
emend _ = Nil
I'm reading from a file using sourceFile, but I also need to introduce randomness into the processing operation. The best approach I believe is to have a producer that is of the type
Producer m (StdGen, ByteString)
where StdGen is used to generate the random number.
I'm intending for the producer to perform the task of sourceFile, as well as producing a new seed to yield everytime it sends data downstream.
My problem is, there doesn't seem to be a source-combiner like zipSink for sinks. Reading through Conduit Overview, it seems to be suggesting that you can embed a Source inside a Conduit, but I'm failing to see how it is done in the example.
Can anyone provide an example of which you fuse two or more IO sources into one single Producer/Source?
EDIT :
An example:
{-# LANGUAGE NoImplicitPrelude #-}
{-# LANGUAGE RankNTypes #-}
{-# LANGUAGE OverloadedStrings #-}
import System.Random (StdGen(..), split, newStdGen, randomR)
import ClassyPrelude.Conduit as Prelude
import Control.Monad.Trans.Resource (runResourceT, ResourceT(..))
import qualified Data.ByteString as BS
-- generate a infinite source of random number seeds
sourceStdGen :: MonadIO m => Source m StdGen
sourceStdGen = do
g <- liftIO newStdGen
loop g
where loop gin = do
let g' = fst (split gin)
yield gin
loop g'
-- combine the sources into one
sourceInput :: (MonadResource m, MonadIO m) => FilePath -> Source m (StdGen, ByteString)
sourceInput fp = getZipSource $ (,)
<$> ZipSource sourceStdGen
<*> ZipSource (sourceFile fp)
-- a simple conduit, which generates a random number from provide StdGen
-- and append the byte value to the provided ByteString
simpleConduit :: Conduit (StdGen, ByteString) (ResourceT IO) ByteString
simpleConduit = mapC process
process :: (StdGen, ByteString) -> ByteString
process (g, bs) =
let rnd = fst $ randomR (40,50) g
in bs ++ pack [rnd]
main :: IO ()
main = do
runResourceT $ sourceInput "test.txt" $$ simpleConduit =$ sinkFile "output.txt"
So this example takes what's in the input file and write it to the output file, as well as appending a random ASCII value between 40 and 50 to the end of the file. (Don't ask me why)
You can use ZipSource for this. In your case, it might look something like:
sourceStdGens :: Source m StdGen
sourceBytes :: Source m ByteString
sourceBoth :: Source m (StdGen, ByteString)
sourceBoth = getZipSource $ (,)
<$> ZipSource sourceStdGens
<*> ZipSource sourceBytes
You can do it in the IO monad then lift the result to a Producer.
do (i, newSeed) <- next currentSeed
b <- generateByteStringFromRandomNumber i
return (b, newSeed)
That IO action can be lifted into the appropriate conduit with a simple lift:
-- assuming the above action is named x and takes the current seed as an argument
-- the corresponding producer/source is:
lift $ x currentSeed
I'm trying to generate a infinite lazy stream of values from IO wrapped by WriterT. I'm using conduits to consume this stream and write it to a file. I'm well aware of the strictness of IO in its bind operator, so how could I produce this stream lazily having IO there?
If it is impossible, should I try to change to lazy ST?
import Data.Conduit
import Control.Monad.Writer
import Data.DList as DL
type Stream = WriterT (DL.DList String) IO ()
generator :: Stream
generator = do
tell $ DL.singleton "something"
generator
runStream :: Stream -> IO ()
runStream s = runResourceT $ stream s
where stream s = sourceStream s $$ sinkStream -- sinkStream just writes to a file
sourceStream s = do w <- liftIO $ execWriterT s
CL.sourceList (DL.toList w)
Seeing that nobody gave a full answer, I'll convert my comment into one. One of the biggest advantages of conduit is that it saves us from using lazy IO! Using a complicated WriterT goes against the idea. Instead, we should make generator a Source and then just plug it with a file Sink:
import Control.Monad
import Data.Conduit
import Data.Conduit.Binary
import qualified Data.ByteString.Char8 as BS
generator :: Monad m => Source m String
generator = replicateM_ 3 (yield "something\n")
-- or `forever (...)` if you want an infinite loop
-- Reads Strings, converts them to ByteStrings and writes
-- to a file.
sinkStream :: MonadResource m => FilePath -> Sink String m ()
sinkStream file = mapInput BS.pack (const Nothing) (sinkFile file)
main :: IO ()
main = runResourceT (generator $$ sinkStream "/tmp/output.txt")