lina writes:
> I have a script like
>
> #!/bin/bash
>
> for i in {0..108}
> do
>
> some job will run for mins &
>
> done
>
> Here I used & for some kinda of parallel.
> but there is a problem,
>
> I wished at most it only run 8 jobs simultantly, no more than 8, once
> finished, a new job can cont
On 1 Feb, 2012, at 1:19, Nicolas Bercher wrote:
> On 31/01/2012 17:22, lina wrote:
>> I need time to understand the suggestions have been given.
>
> Yes, of course. But this may interest other pepole on the list since your
> topic since to be of great interest for others, including me!
http:/
I need time to understand the suggestions have been given.
A quick thanks.
Best regards,
On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 12:10 AM, Nicolas Bercher wrote:
> What about the use of ulimit or any other tool that your sysadmin could
> control?
>
> On the other hand, these solutions seem ok:
>
> http://stack
What about the use of ulimit or any other tool that your sysadmin could control?
On the other hand, these solutions seem ok:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1537956/bash-limit-the-number-of-concurrent-jobs
Nicolas
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a
On 31/01/2012 03:19, Cam Hutchison wrote:
seq 0 108 | xargs -I@ -P8 cat A_@.txt B_@.txt C_@.txt -o ABC_@.txt
Of course, this is (since cat -o doesn't exist):
seq 0 108 | xargs -I@ -P8 cat A_@.txt B_@.txt C_@.txt > ABC_@.txt
but "> ABC_@.txt" is out of the scope of xargs.
Nicolas
--
To UN
lina writes:
>Yes. the ultimate goal is:
>for i in {0..108}
>do
>cat A_$i.txt B_$i.txt C_$i.txt -o ABC_$i.txt (output as ABC_$i.txt)
>done
>but here I wish to use only 8 processors at most, total is 16.
>the administrator of the cluster asked me not to use whole, cause
>someone else needs SMP
On 20120130_223623, Jochen Spieker wrote:
> lina:
> >
> > Yes. the ultimate goal is:
> >
> > for i in {0..108}
> > do
> > cat A_$i.txt B_$i.txt C_$i.txt -o ABC_$i.txt (output as ABC_$i.txt)
> > done
>
> Ok, so you don't actually have only A_$i filenames, but B_$i and C_$i as
> well. That alone
lina:
>
> Yes. the ultimate goal is:
>
> for i in {0..108}
> do
> cat A_$i.txt B_$i.txt C_$i.txt -o ABC_$i.txt (output as ABC_$i.txt)
> done
Ok, so you don't actually have only A_$i filenames, but B_$i and C_$i as
well. That alone makes my previous approach useless (as I predicted!).
The other
On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 12:05 AM, Jochen Spieker wrote:
> lina:
>>
>> well, a question,
>>
>> $ seq 0 3 | xargs --verbose echo A
>> echo A 0 1 2 3
>> A 0 1 2 3
>>
>> How can I make the output as:
>>
>> A0 A1 A2 A3
>
> Your problem in this case is that xargs adds whitespace before adding
> argument
lina:
>
> well, a question,
>
> $ seq 0 3 | xargs --verbose echo A
> echo A 0 1 2 3
> A 0 1 2 3
>
> How can I make the output as:
>
> A0 A1 A2 A3
Your problem in this case is that xargs adds whitespace before adding
arguments. What you can do is to modify seq's output before xargs sees
it:
$
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 10:29 PM, Jochen Spieker wrote:
> lina:
>> On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 6:35 PM, Jochen Spieker
>> wrote:
>>> lina:
I wished at most it only run 8 jobs simultantly, no more than 8, once
finished, a new job can continue,
>>>
>>> Xargs can be used for this. An exm
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 10:11 PM, Darac Marjal wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 06:06:06PM +0800, lina wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> ( sorry if it a bit off-topic)
>>
>> I have a script like
>>
>> #!/bin/bash
>>
>> for i in {0..108}
>> do
>>
>> some job will run for mins &
>>
>> done
>>
>> Here I used & for
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 10:08 PM, Chen Wei wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 06:06:06PM +0800, lina wrote:
>> I have a script like
>>
>> #!/bin/bash
>> for i in {0..108}
>> do
>>
>> some job will run for mins &
>> done
>>
>> Here I used & for some kinda of parallel.
>> but there is a problem,
>> I
lina:
> On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 6:35 PM, Jochen Spieker wrote:
>> lina:
>>>
>>> I wished at most it only run 8 jobs simultantly, no more than 8, once
>>> finished, a new job can continue,
>>
>> Xargs can be used for this. An exmaple:
>>
>> $ seq 1 100 | xargs -n1 -P8 echo
>>
>> Seq prints the
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 06:06:06PM +0800, lina wrote:
> Hi,
>
> ( sorry if it a bit off-topic)
>
> I have a script like
>
> #!/bin/bash
>
> for i in {0..108}
> do
>
> some job will run for mins &
>
> done
>
> Here I used & for some kinda of parallel.
> but there is a problem,
>
> I wished a
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 06:06:06PM +0800, lina wrote:
> I have a script like
>
> #!/bin/bash
> for i in {0..108}
> do
>
> some job will run for mins &
> done
>
> Here I used & for some kinda of parallel.
> but there is a problem,
> I wished at most it only run 8 jobs simultantly, no more than 8,
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 6:35 PM, Jochen Spieker wrote:
> lina:
>>
>> I wished at most it only run 8 jobs simultantly, no more than 8, once
>> finished, a new job can continue,
>
> Xargs can be used for this. An exmaple:
>
> $ seq 1 100 | xargs -n1 -P8 echo
>
> Seq prints the numbers from 1 to 100
lina:
>
> I wished at most it only run 8 jobs simultantly, no more than 8, once
> finished, a new job can continue,
Xargs can be used for this. An exmaple:
$ seq 1 100 | xargs -n1 -P8 echo
Seq prints the numbers from 1 to 100 (one per line) and xargs starts an
echo for each argument with 8 invo
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 6:06 PM, lina wrote:
> Hi,
>
> ( sorry if it a bit off-topic)
>
> I have a script like
>
> #!/bin/bash
>
> for i in {0..108}
> do
>
> some job will run for mins &
>
> done
>
> Here I used & for some kinda of parallel.
> but there is a problem,
>
> I wished at most it only r
Hi,
( sorry if it a bit off-topic)
I have a script like
#!/bin/bash
for i in {0..108}
do
some job will run for mins &
done
Here I used & for some kinda of parallel.
but there is a problem,
I wished at most it only run 8 jobs simultantly, no more than 8, once
finished, a new job can continue
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11/28/07 16:07, Jerome BENOIT wrote:
[snip]
>
> Indeed I have a P4 HT :
> must I build a SMP kernel as suggested by Knoppix ?
HT isn't all that it's cracked up to be. You *might* get better
performance by disabling it from the BIOS.
- --
Ron Joh
Hi,
thanks for your answers.
strawks wrote:
Hello,
sorry, I forgot to tell that `/proc/cpuinfo'
shows up _two_ processors (when the kernel is a SMP one).
Furthermore,
the concerned black box is a very old one:
before september 2003 (kernel 2.4.22).
According to `/proc/cpuinfo', there are tw
Jerome BENOIT wrote:
Hello List,
today I built a new kernel for one computer of the lab:
whereas the boss claims that it has only one processor,
Knoppix claims that there are two processors.
Booting a smp kernel shows two processors.
I am quite confused: how to know for sure
the number of
Hello,
> sorry, I forgot to tell that `/proc/cpuinfo'
> shows up _two_ processors (when the kernel is a SMP one).
>
> Furthermore,
> the concerned black box is a very old one:
> before september 2003 (kernel 2.4.22).
>
> According to `/proc/cpuinfo', there are two
>
> Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU
gt;
>
> Andoni wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>>> today I built a new kernel for one computer of the lab:
>>> whereas the boss claims that it has only one processor,
>>> Knoppix claims that there are two processors.
>>> Booting a smp kernel shows two process
ows two processors.
> I am quite confused: how to know for sure
> the number of processors in a black box ?
In /proc/cpuinfo, the "physical id" change when you have really several
processors.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
advance,
Jerome
Andoni wrote:
Hi,
today I built a new kernel for one computer of the lab:
whereas the boss claims that it has only one processor,
Knoppix claims that there are two processors.
Booting a smp kernel shows two processors.
I am quite confused: how to know for sure
the number of
advance,
Jerome
Andoni wrote:
Hi,
today I built a new kernel for one computer of the lab:
whereas the boss claims that it has only one processor,
Knoppix claims that there are two processors.
Booting a smp kernel shows two processors.
I am quite confused: how to know for sure
the number of
Jerome BENOIT:
>
> today I built a new kernel for one computer of the lab:
> whereas the boss claims that it has only one processor,
> Knoppix claims that there are two processors.
It's probably a single processor with multiple cores, hyperthreading or
something similar.
J.
--
I use a Playstati
Hi,
> today I built a new kernel for one computer of the lab:
> whereas the boss claims that it has only one processor,
> Knoppix claims that there are two processors.
> Booting a smp kernel shows two processors.
> I am quite confused: how to know for sure
> the number of pro
Hello List,
today I built a new kernel for one computer of the lab:
whereas the boss claims that it has only one processor,
Knoppix claims that there are two processors.
Booting a smp kernel shows two processors.
I am quite confused: how to know for sure
the number of processors in a black box
On Saturday 10 July 2004 21:12, Joakim Franzen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Just installed the latest debian-sarge and have the 2.6.6-smp kernel
> package added. What is really strange is that debian detects 4
> processors but the server only has 2.
>
> The system is a Dell PowerEdge 1600 with dual 2.4GHz Xeon
On Sat, 10 Jul 2004 22:12:13 +0200
Joakim Franzen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Just installed the latest debian-sarge and have the 2.6.6-smp kernel
> package added. What is really strange is that debian detects 4
> processors but the server only has 2.
>
> The system is a Dell PowerEdg
Hi,
Just installed the latest debian-sarge and have the 2.6.6-smp kernel
package added. What is really strange is that debian detects 4
processors but the server only has 2.
The system is a Dell PowerEdge 1600 with dual 2.4GHz Xeon.
Anyone know why this is happening?
Regards,
Joakim
--
To UNSUBS
> A little off topic...
>
> Does anyone know how to get the number of CPU's
> that a machine has using the "C" programming
> language?Any URL's on the subject?
open /proc/cpuinfo and look how many processor entries it has.
mfg
Mischel S aus P
Homepage: http://fsinfo.cs.uni-sb.de/~waldi
surely you cannot have a truly portable system that enumerates "cpus"
after all who says there has to be one?
Do numerical or I/O co-processors count as cpus? unless the architecture
is defined it makes no sense, and if the architecture is defined you may
as well define something like /proc and if
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far way, someone said...
> Nope. We have to use some "C" or "C++" system/function call. Our
> programmers don't want to depend on the /proc file system being
> available.
If you're looking for an OS independant way
On Tue, 5 Dec 2000, Christopher W. Aiken wrote:
> Nope. We have to use some "C" or "C++" system/function call. Our
> programmers don't want to depend on the /proc file system being
> available.
Any reasonable Linux system will have the /proc file system. There is no
way to do it in C. If ther
Christopher W. Aiken wrote:
> Does anyone know how to get the number of CPU's that a machine has
> using the "C" programming language?Any URL's on the subject?
This is specific to the kernel you are talking to. DOS has different
API than Linux for retrieving this information. Of course, you
On Tue, Dec 05, 2000 at 02:53:01PM -0500, Christopher W. Aiken wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Dec 2000, Harry Henry Gebel wrote:
>
> Nope. We have to use some "C" or "C++" system/function
> call. Our programmers don't want to depend on the
> /proc file system being available.
I doubt there is such a system
On Tue, 5 Dec 2000, Harry Henry Gebel wrote:
-|On Tue, Dec 05, 2000 at 02:01:05PM -0500, Christopher W. Aiken wrote:
-|> Does anyone know how to get the number of CPU's
-|> that a machine has using the "C" programming
-|> language?Any URL's on the subject?
-|
-|There's probably can easier way
On Tue, Dec 05, 2000 at 02:01:05PM -0500, Christopher W. Aiken wrote:
> A little off topic...
>
> Does anyone know how to get the number of CPU's
> that a machine has using the "C" programming
> language?Any URL's on the subject?
>
> Thanks you...
>
What about parsing /proc/cpuinfo? (this r
A little off topic...
Does anyone know how to get the number of CPU's
that a machine has using the "C" programming
language?Any URL's on the subject?
Thanks you...
-=[cwa]=-
---
Christopher W. Aiken, Scenery Hill, Pa, USA
chris at cwaiken dot com, www.c
43 matches
Mail list logo
