I have an array of precomputed integers, it's fixed size of 15M values. I need to load these values at the program start. Currently it takes up to 2 mins to load, file size is ~130MB. Is it any way to speed-up loading. I'm free to change save process as well.
std::array<int, 15000000> keys;
std::string config = "config.dat";
// how array is saved
std::ofstream out(config.c_str());
std::copy(keys.cbegin(), keys.cend(),
std::ostream_iterator<int>(out, "\n"));
// load of array
std::ifstream in(config.c_str());
std::copy(std::istream_iterator<int>(in),
std::istream_iterator<int>(), keys.begin());
in_ranks.close();
Thanks in advance.
SOLVED. Used the approach proposed in accepted answer. Now it takes just a blink.
Thanks all for your insights.
You have two issues regarding the speed of your write and read operations.
First, std::copy cannot do a block copy optimization when writing to an output_iterator because it doesn't have direct access to underlying target.
Second, you're writing the integers out as ascii and not binary, so for each iteration of your write output_iterator is creating an ascii representation of your int and on read it has to parse the text back into integers. I believe this is the brunt of your performance issue.
The raw storage of your array (assuming a 4 byte int) should only be 60MB, but since each character of an integer in ascii is 1 byte any ints with more than 4 characters are going to be larger than the binary storage, hence your 130MB file.
There is not an easy way to solve your speed problem portably (so that the file can be read on different endian or int sized machines) or when using std::copy. The easiest way is to just dump the whole of the array to disk and then read it all back using fstream.write and read, just remember that it's not strictly portable.
To write:
std::fstream out(config.c_str(), ios::out | ios::binary);
out.write( keys.data(), keys.size() * sizeof(int) );
And to read:
std::fstream in(config.c_str(), ios::in | ios::binary);
in.read( keys.data(), keys.size() * sizeof(int) );
----Update----
If you are really concerned about portability you could easily use a portable format (like your initial ascii version) in your distribution artifacts then when the program is first run it could convert that portable format to a locally optimized version for use during subsequent executions.
Something like this perhaps:
std::array<int, 15000000> keys;
// data.txt are the ascii values and data.bin is the binary version
if(!file_exists("data.bin")) {
std::ifstream in("data.txt");
std::copy(std::istream_iterator<int>(in),
std::istream_iterator<int>(), keys.begin());
in.close();
std::fstream out("data.bin", ios::out | ios::binary);
out.write( keys.data(), keys.size() * sizeof(int) );
} else {
std::fstream in("data.bin", ios::in | ios::binary);
in.read( keys.data(), keys.size() * sizeof(int) );
}
If you have an install process this preprocessing could also be done at that time...
Attention. Reality check ahead:
Reading integers from a large text file is an IO bound operation unless you're doing something completely wrong (like using C++ streams for this). Loading 15M integers from a text file takes less than 2 seconds on an AMD64#3GHZ when the file is already buffered (and only a bit long if had to be fetched from a sufficiently fast disk). Here's a quick & dirty routine to prove my point (that's why I do not check for all possible errors in the format of the integers, nor close my files at the end, because I exit() anyway).
$ wc nums.txt
15000000 15000000 156979060 nums.txt
$ head -n 5 nums.txt
730547560
-226810937
607950954
640895092
884005970
$ g++ -O2 read.cc
$ time ./a.out <nums.txt
=>1752547657
real 0m1.781s
user 0m1.651s
sys 0m0.114s
$ cat read.cc
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <ctype.h>
#include <vector>
int main()
{
char c;
int num=0;
int pos=1;
int line=1;
std::vector<int> res;
while(c=getchar(),c!=EOF)
{
if (c>='0' && c<='9')
num=num*10+c-'0';
else if (c=='-')
pos=0;
else if (c=='\n')
{
res.push_back(pos?num:-num);
num=0;
pos=1;
line++;
}
else
{
printf("I've got a problem with this file at line %d\n",line);
exit(1);
}
}
// make sure the optimizer does not throw vector away, also a check.
unsigned sum=0;
for (int i=0;i<res.size();i++)
{
sum=sum+(unsigned)res[i];
}
printf("=>%d\n",sum);
}
UPDATE: and here's my result when read the text file (not binary) using mmap:
$ g++ -O2 mread.cc
$ time ./a.out nums.txt
=>1752547657
real 0m0.559s
user 0m0.478s
sys 0m0.081s
code's on pastebin:
http://pastebin.com/NgqFa11k
What do I suggest
1-2 seconds is a realistic lower bound for a typical desktop machine for load this data. 2 minutes sounds more like a 60 Mhz micro controller reading from a cheap SD card. So either you have an undetected/unmentioned hardware condition or your implementation of C++ stream is somehow broken or unusable. I suggest to establish a lower bound for this task on your your machine by running my sample code.
if the integers are saved in binary format and you're not concerned with Endian problems, try reading the entire file into memory at once (fread) and cast the pointer to int *
You could precompile the array into a .o file, which wouldn't need to be recompiled unless the data changes.
thedata.hpp:
static const int NUM_ENTRIES = 5;
extern int thedata[NUM_ENTRIES];
thedata.cpp:
#include "thedata.hpp"
int thedata[NUM_ENTRIES] = {
10
,200
,3000
,40000
,500000
};
To compile this:
# make thedata.o
Then your main application would look something like:
#include "thedata.hpp"
using namespace std;
int main() {
for (int i=0; i<NUM_ENTRIES; i++) {
cout << thedata[i] << endl;
}
}
Assuming the data doesn't change often, and that you can process the data to create thedata.cpp, then this is effectively instant loadtime. I don't know if the compiler would choke on such a large literal array though!
Save the file in a binary format.
Write the file by taking a pointer to the start of your int array and convert it to a char pointer. Then write the 15000000*sizeof(int) chars to the file.
And when you read the file, do the same in reverse: read the file as a sequence of chars, take a pointer to the beginning of the sequence, and convert it to an int*.
of course, this assumes that endianness isn't an issue.
For actually reading and writing the file, memory mapping is probably the most sensible approach.
If the numbers never change, preprocess the file into a C++ source and compile it into the application.
If the number can change and thus you have to keep them in separate file that you have to load on startup then avoid doing that number by number using C++ IO streams. C++ IO streams are nice abstraction but there is too much of it for such simple task as loading a bunch of number fast. In my experience, huge part of the run time is spent in parsing the numbers and another in accessing the file char by char.
(Assuming your file is more than single long line.) Read the file line by line using std::getline(), parse numbers out of each line using not streams but std::strtol(). This avoids huge part of the overhead. You can get more speed out of the streams by crafting your own variant of std::getline(), such that reads the input ahead (using istream::read()); standard std::getline() also reads input char by char.
Use a buffer of 1000 (or even 15M, you can modify this size as you please) integers, not integer after integer. Not using a buffer is clearly the problem in my opinion.
If the data in the file is binary and you don't have to worry about endianess, and you're on a system that supports it, use the mmap system call. See this article on IBM's website:
High-performance network programming, Part 2: Speed up processing at both the client and server
Also see this SO post:
When should I use mmap for file access?
Related
I want rewrite file with 0's. It only write a few bytes.
My code:
int fileSize = boost::filesystem::file_size(filePath);
int zeros[fileSize] = { 0 };
boost::filesystem::path rewriteFilePath{filePath};
boost::filesystem::ofstream rewriteFile{rewriteFilePath, std::ios::trunc};
rewriteFile << zeros;
Also... Is this enough to shred the file? What should I do next to make the file unrecoverable?
EDIT: Ok. I rewrited my code to this. Is this code ok to do this?
int fileSize = boost::filesystem::file_size(filePath);
boost::filesystem::path rewriteFilePath{filePath};
boost::filesystem::ofstream rewriteFile{rewriteFilePath, std::ios::trunc};
for(int i = 0; i < fileSize; i++) {
rewriteFile << 0;
}
There are several problems with your code.
int zeros[fileSize] = { 0 };
You are creating an array that is sizeof(int) * fileSize bytes in size. For what you are attempting, you need an array that is fileSize bytes in size instead. So you need to use a 1-byte data type, like (unsigned) char or uint8_t.
But, more importantly, since the value of fileSize is not known until runtime, this type of array is known as a "Variable Length Array" (VLA), which is a non-standard feature in C++. Use std::vector instead if you need a dynamically allocated array.
boost::filesystem::ofstream rewriteFile{rewriteFilePath, std::ios::trunc};
The trunc flag truncates the size of an existing file to 0. What that entails is to update the file's metadata to reset its tracked byte size, and to mark all of the file's used disk sectors as available for reuse. The actual file bytes stored in those sectors are not wiped out until overwritten as sectors get reused over time. But any bytes you subsequently write to the truncated file are not guaranteed to (and likely will not) overwrite the old bytes on disk. So, do not truncate the file at all.
rewriteFile << zeros;
ofstream does not have an operator<< that takes an int[], or even an int*, as input. But it does have an operator<< that takes a void* as input (to output the value of the memory address being pointed at). An array decays into a pointer to the first element, and void* accepts any pointer. This is why only a few bytes are being written. You need to use ofstream::write() instead to write the array to file, and be sure to open the file with the binary flag.
Try this instead:
int fileSize = boost::filesystem::file_size(filePath);
std::vector<char> zeros(fileSize, 0);
boost::filesystem::path rewriteFilePath(filePath);
boost::filesystem::ofstream rewriteFile(rewriteFilePath, std::ios::binary);
rewriteFile.write(zeros.data()/*&zeros[0]*/, fileSize);
That being said, you don't need a dynamically allocated array at all, let alone one that is allocated to the full size of the file. That is just a waste of heap memory, especially for large files. You can do this instead:
int fileSize = boost::filesystem::file_size(filePath);
const char zeros[1024] = {0}; // adjust size as desired...
boost::filesystem::path rewriteFilePath(filePath);
boost::filesystem::ofstream rewriteFile(rewriteFilePath, std::ios::binary);
int loops = fileSize / sizeof(zeros);
for(int i = 0; i < loops; ++i) {
rewriteFile.write(zeros, sizeof(zeros));
}
rewriteFile.write(zeros, fileSize % sizeof(zeros));
Alternatively, if you open a memory-mapped view of the file (MapViewOfFile() on Windows, mmap() on Linux, etc) then you can simply use std::copy() or std::memset() to zero out the bytes of the entire file directly on disk without using an array at all.
Also... Is this enough to shred the file?
Not really, no. At the physical hardware layer, overwriting the file just one time with zeros can still leave behind remnant signals in the disk sectors, which can be recovered with sufficient tools. You should overwrite the file multiple times, with varying types of random data, not just zeros. That will more thoroughly scramble the signals in the sectors.
I cannot stress strongly enough the importance of the comments that overwriting a file's contents does not guarantee that any of the original data is overwritten. ALL OTHER ANSWERS TO THIS QUESTION ARE THEREFORE IRRELEVANT ON ANY RECENT OPERATING SYSTEM.
Modern filing systems are extents based, meaning that files are stored as a linked list of allocated chunks. Updating a chunk may be faster for the filing system to write a whole new chunk and simply adjust the linked list, so that's what they do. Indeed copy-on-write filing systems always write a copy of any modified chunk and update their B-tree of currently valid extents.
Furthermore, even if your filing system doesn't do this, your hard drive may use the exact same technique also for performance, and any SSD almost certainly always uses this technique due to how flash memory works. So overwriting data to "erase" it is meaningless on modern systems. Can't be done. The only safe way to keep old data hidden is full disk encryption. Anything else you are deceiving yourself and your users.
Just for fun, overwriting with random data:
Live On Coliru
#include <boost/iostreams/device/mapped_file.hpp>
#include <random>
namespace bio = boost::iostreams;
int main() {
bio::mapped_file dst("main.cpp");
std::mt19937 rng { std::random_device{} () };
std::uniform_int_distribution<char> dist;
std::generate_n(dst.data(), dst.size(), [&] { return dist(rng); });
}
Note that it scrambles its own source file after compilation :)
I am using boost::iostreams::mapped_file_source to read a text file from a specific position to a specific position and to manipulate each line (compiled using g++ -Wall -O3 -lboost_iostreams -o test main.cpp):
#include <iostream>
#include <string>
#include <boost/iostreams/device/mapped_file.hpp>
int main() {
boost::iostreams::mapped_file_source f_read;
f_read.open("in.txt");
long long int alignment_offset(0);
// set the start point
const char* pt_current(f_read.data() + alignment_offset);
// set the end point
const char* pt_last(f_read.data() + f_read.size());
const char* pt_current_line_start(pt_current);
std::string buffer;
while (pt_current && (pt_current != pt_last)) {
if ((pt_current = static_cast<const char*>(memchr(pt_current, '\n', pt_last - pt_current)))) {
buffer.assign(pt_current_line_start, pt_current - pt_current_line_start + 1);
// do something with buffer
pt_current++;
pt_current_line_start = pt_current;
}
}
return 0;
}
Currently, I would like to make this code handle gzip files as well and modify the code like this:
#include<iostream>
#include<boost/iostreams/device/mapped_file.hpp>
#include<boost/iostreams/filter/gzip.hpp>
#include<boost/iostreams/filtering_streambuf.hpp>
#include<boost/iostreams/filtering_stream.hpp>
#include<boost/iostreams/stream.hpp>
int main() {
boost::iostreams::stream<boost::iostreams::mapped_file_source> file;
file.open(boost::iostreams::mapped_file_source("in.txt.gz"));
boost::iostreams::filtering_streambuf< boost::iostreams::input > in;
in.push(boost::iostreams::gzip_decompressor());
in.push(file);
std::istream std_str(&in);
std::string buffer;
while(1) {
std::getline(std_str, buffer);
if (std_str.eof()) break;
// do something with buffer
}
}
This code also work well but I don't know how can set the start point (pt_current) and the end point (pt_last) like the first code. Could you let me know how I can set the two values in the second code?
The answer is no, that's not possible. The compressed stream would need to have indexes.
The real question is Why?. You are using a memory mapped file. Doing on-the-fly compression/decompression is only going to reduce performance and increase memory consumption.
If you're not short on actual file storage, then you should probably consider a binary representation, or keep the text as it is.
Binary representation could sidestep most of the complexity involved when using text files with random access.
Some inspirational samples:
Simplest way to read a CSV file mapped to memory?
Using boost::iostreams::mapped_file_source with std::multimap
Iterating over mmaped gzip file with boost
What you're basically discovering is that text files aren't random access, and compression makes indexing essentially fuzzy (there is no precise mapping from compressed stream offset to uncompressed stream offset).
Look at the zran.c example in the zlib distribution as mentioned in the zlib FAQ:
28. Can I access data randomly in a compressed stream?
No, not without some preparation. If when compressing you periodically use Z_FULL_FLUSH, carefully write all the pending data at those points, and keep an index of those locations, then you can start decompression at those points. You have to be careful to not use Z_FULL_FLUSH too often, since it can significantly degrade compression. Alternatively, you can scan a deflate stream once to generate an index, and then use that index for random access. See examples/zran.c
ยน you could specifically look at parallel implementations such as e.g. pbzip2 or pigz; These will necessarily use these "chunks" or "frames" to schedule the load across cores
Have stumbled upon this code to insert the contents of a file into a vector. Seems like a useful thing to learn how to do:
#include <iostream>
#include <fstream>
#include <vector>
int main() {
typedef std::vector<char> fileContainer;
std::ifstream testFile("testfile.txt");
fileContainer container;
container.assign(
(std::istreambuf_iterator<char>(testFile)),
std::istreambuf_iterator<char>());
return 0;
}
It works but I'd like to ask is this the best way to do such a thing? That is, to take the contents any file type and insert it into an appropriate STL container. Is there a more efficient way of doing this than above? As i understand, it creates a testFile instance of ifstream and fills it with the contents of testfile.txt, then that copy is again copied into the container through assign. Seems like a lot of copying?
As for speed/efficiency, I'm not sure how to estimate the file size and use the reserve function with that, if i use reserve it appears to slow this code down even. At the moment swapping out vector and just using a deque is quite a bit more efficient it seems.
I'm not sure that there's a best way, but using the two iterator
constructor would be more idiomatic:
FileContainer container( (std::istreambuf_iterator<char>( testFile )),
(std::istreambuf_iterator<char>()) );
(I notice that you have the extra parentheses in your assign. They
aren't necessary there, but they are when you use the constructor.)
With regards to performance, it would be more efficient to pre-allocate
the data, something like:
FileContainer container( actualSizeOfFile );
std::copy( std::istreambuf_iterator<char>( testFile ),
std::istreambuf_iterator<char>(),
container.begin() );
This is slightly dangerous; if your estimation is too small, you'll
encounter undefined behavior. To avoid this, you could also do:
FileContainer container;
container.reserve( estimatedSizeOfFile );
container.insert( container.begin(),
std::istreambuf_iterator<char>( testFile ),
std::istreambuf_iterator<char>() );
Which of these two is faster will depend on the implementation; the last
time I measured (with g++), the first was slightly faster, but if you're
actually reading from file, the difference probably isn't measurable.
The problem with these two methods is that, despite other answers, there
is no portable way of finding the file size other than by actually
reading the file. Non-portable methods exist for some systems (fstat
under Unix), but on other systems, like Windows, there is no means
of finding the exact number of char you can read from a text file.
And of course, there's no guarantee that the results of tellg() will
even convert to an integral type, and that if it does, that they won't
be a magic cookie, with no numerical signification.
Having said that, in practice, the use of tellg() suggested by other
posters will often be "portable enough" (Windows and most Unix, at
least), and the results will often be "close enough"; they'll usually be
a little too high under Windows (since the results will count the
carriage return characters which won't be read), but in a lot of cases,
that's not a big problem. In the end, it's up to you to decide what
your requirements are with regards to portability and precision of the
size.
it creates a testFile instance of ifstream and fills it with the contents of testfile.txt
No, it opens testfile.txt and calls the handle testFile. There is one copy being made, from disk to memory. (Except that I/O is commonly done by another copy through kernel space, but you're not going to avoid that in a portable way.)
As for speed/efficiency, i'm not sure how to estimate the file size and use the reserve function with that
If the file is a regular file:
std::ifstream testFile("testfile.txt");
testFile.seekg(0, std::ios::end);
std::ios::streampos size = testFile.tellg();
testFile.seekg(0, std::ios::beg);
std::vector<char> container;
container.reserve(size);
Then fill container as before. Or construct it as std::vector<char> container(size) and fill it with
testFile.read(&container.front, size);
Which one is faster should be determined by profiling.
The std::ifstream is not fulled with the contents of the file, the contents are read on demand. Some kind of buffering is involved, so the file would be read in chunks of k-bytes. Since stream iterators are InputIterators, it should be more efficient to call reserve on the vector first; but only if you already have that information or can guess a good approximate, otherwise you would have to iterate through the file contents twice.
People much more frequently want to read from a file into a string than a vector. If you can use that, you might want to see the answer I posted to a previous question.
A minor edit of the fourth test there will give this:
std::vector<char> s4;
file.seekg(0, std::ios::end);
s4.resize(file.tellg());
file.seekg(0, std::ios::beg);
file.read(&s4[0], s4.size());
My guess is that this should give performance essentially indistinguishable from the code using a string. Depending on your compiler/standard library, this is likely to be substantially faster than your current code (again, see the timing results there for some idea of the difference you're likely to see).
Also note that this gives a little extra ability to detect and diagnose errors. For example, you can check whether you successfully read the entire file by comparing s4.size() to file.gcount() (and/or check for file.eof()). This also makes it a bit easier to prevent problems by limiting the amount you read, in case somebody decides to see what happens when/if they try to use your program to read a file that's, say, 6 terabytes.
There is definitely a better way if you want to make it efficient. You can check the file size, pre-allocate vector and read directly into vector's memory. A simple example:
#include <sys/types.h>
#include <sys/stat.h>
#include <unistd.h>
#include <fcntl.h>
#include <cstdio>
#include <cstdlib>
#include <vector>
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
int main ()
{
int fd = open ("test.data", O_RDONLY);
if (fd == -1)
{
perror ("open");
return EXIT_FAILURE;
}
struct stat info;
int res = fstat (fd, &info);
if (res != 0)
{
perror ("fstat");
return EXIT_FAILURE;
}
std::vector<char> data;
if (info.st_size > 0)
{
data.resize (info.st_size);
ssize_t x = read (fd, &data[0], data.size ());
if (x != info.st_size)
{
perror ("read");
return EXIT_FAILURE;
}
cout << "Data (" << info.st_size << "):\n";
cout.write (&data[0], data.size ());
}
}
There are other more efficient ways for some tasks. For example, to copy file without transferring data to and from user space, you can use sendfile etc.
It does work, and it is convenient, but there are many situations where it is a bad idea.
Error handling in a user-edited file, for example. If the user has hand edited a data file or it has been imported from a spreadsheet or even a database with lax field definitions, then this method of filling the vector will result in a simple error with no detail.
In order to process the file and report where the error happened, you need to read it line by line and attempt the conversion to a number on each line. Then you can report the line number and the text that failed to convert. This is extremely useful. Without this feature the user is left to wonder which line caused the problem instead of being able to immediately fix it.
I've got a struct with 2 integers, and I want to store them in a binary file and read it again.
Here is my code:
static const char *ADMIN_FILE = "admin.bin";
struct pw {
int a;
int b;
};
void main(){
pw* p = new pw();
pw* q = new pw();
std::ofstream fout(ADMIN_FILE, ios_base::out | ios_base::binary | ios_base::trunc);
std::ifstream fin(ADMIN_FILE, ios_base::in | ios_base::binary);
p->a=123;
p->b=321;
fout.write((const char*)p, sizeof(pw));
fin.read((char*)q, sizeof(pw));
fin.close();
cout << q->a << endl;
}
The output I get is 0. Can anyone tell me what is the problem?
You probably want to flush fout before you read from it.
To flush the stream, do the following:
fout.flush();
The reason for this is that fstreams generally want to buffer the output as long as possible to reduce cost. To force the buffer to be emptied, you call flush on the stream.
When storing integers to files, you can use the htonl(), ntohl() family of functions to ensure that they will be read back in the correct format regardless of whether the file is written out on a big-endian machine, and read back later on a small-endian machine. The functions were intended for network use, but can be valuable when writing to files.
fin.write((char*)q, sizeof(pw));
Should probably be
fin.read((char*)q, sizeof(pw));
Be warned that your method assumes things about the size and endianness of your integers and the packing of your structures, none of which is necessarily going to be true if your code gets ported to another machine.
For portability reasons, you want to have output routines that output the fields of structures separately, and that output numbers at specific bitwidths with specific endianness. This is why there are serialization packages.
try this:
fout.write((const char*)&p, sizeof(pw));
fin.read((char*)&q, sizeof(pw));
instead of
fout.write((const char*)p, sizeof(pw));
fin.read((char*)q, sizeof(pw));
vagothcpp (yournotsosmartc++programmer=p)
I have a large vector (10^9 elements) of chars, and I was wondering what is the fastest way to write such vector to a file. So far I've been using next code:
vector<char> vs;
// ... Fill vector with data
ofstream outfile("nanocube.txt", ios::out | ios::binary);
ostream_iterator<char> oi(outfile, '\0');
copy(vs.begin(), vs.end(), oi);
For this code it takes approximately two minutes to write all data to file. The actual question is: "Can I make it faster using STL and how"?
With such a large amount of data to be written (~1GB), you should write to the output stream directly, rather than using an output iterator. Since the data in a vector is stored contiguously, this will work and should be much faster.
ofstream outfile("nanocube.txt", ios::out | ios::binary);
outfile.write(&vs[0], vs.size());
There is a slight conceptual error with your second argument to ostream_iterator's constructor. It should be NULL pointer, if you don't want a delimiter (although, luckily for you, this will be treated as such implicitly), or the second argument should be omitted.
However, this means that after writing each character, the code needs to check for the pointer designating the delimiter (which might be somewhat inefficient).
I think, if you want to go with iterators, perhaps you could try ostreambuf_iterator.
Other options might include using the write() method (if it can handle output this large, or perhaps output it in chunks), and perhaps OS-specific output functions.
Since your data is contiguous in memory (as Charles said), you can use low level I/O. On Unix or Linux, you can do your write to a file descriptor. On Windows XP, use file handles. (It's a little trickier on XP, but well documented in MSDN.)
XP is a little funny about buffering. If you write a 1GB block to a handle, it will be slower than if you break the write up into smaller transfer sizes (in a loop). I've found the 256KB writes are most efficient. Once you've written the loop, you can play around with this and see what's the fastest transfer size.
OK, I did write method implementation with for loop that writes 256KB blocks (as Rob suggested) of data at each iteration and result is 16 seconds, so problem solved. This is my humble implementation so feel free to comment:
void writeCubeToFile(const vector<char> &vs)
{
const unsigned int blocksize = 262144;
unsigned long blocks = distance(vs.begin(), vs.end()) / blocksize;
ofstream outfile("nanocube.txt", ios::out | ios::binary);
for(unsigned long i = 0; i <= blocks; i++)
{
unsigned long position = blocksize * i;
if(blocksize > distance(vs.begin() + position, vs.end())) outfile.write(&*(vs.begin() + position), distance(vs.begin() + position, vs.end()));
else outfile.write(&*(vs.begin() + position), blocksize);
}
outfile.write("\0", 1);
outfile.close();
}
Thnx to all of you.
If you have other structure this method is still valid.
For example:
typedef std::pair<int,int> STL_Edge;
vector<STL_Edge> v;
void write_file(const char * path){
ofstream outfile(path, ios::out | ios::binary);
outfile.write((const char *)&v.front(), v.size()*sizeof(STL_Edge));
}
void read_file(const char * path,int reserveSpaceForEntries){
ifstream infile(path, ios::in | ios::binary);
v.resize(reserveSpaceForEntries);
infile.read((char *)&v.front(), v.size()*sizeof(STL_Edge));
}
Instead of writing via the file i/o methods, you could try to create a memory-mapped file, and then copy the vector to the memory-mapped file using memcpy.
Use the write method on it, it is in ram after all and you have contigous memory.. Fastest, while looking for flexibility later? Lose the built-in buffering, hint sequential i/o, lose the hidden things of iterator/utility, avoid streambuf when you can but do get dirty with boost::asio ..