Re: Testing many devices - are threads the answer?

Concurrency gives you simultaneous execution, but not necessarily speed. The question you really need to ask is what is the bottleneck. If it is the in the code formatting the results, threading will not help you at all. If you are spending timing waiting for the devices to respond back, then threading will probably help you.

I would suggest you look at your code with Devel::NYTProf to get a detailed look at what your program is doing and then decide what you want to do.

Comment on Re: Testing many devices - are threads the answer?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Testing many devices - are threads the answer? by McDarren (Abbot) on May 12, 2009 at 14:33 UTC
"The question you really need to ask is what is the bottleneck" Although I haven't done any proper profiling, I'm quite certain (through observation of the logs that I create) that the bottleneck is caused through waiting for timeouts as each "offline" device is encountered. Whenever this happens, the script basically blocks and waits, before proceeding. The problem this creates for me (which I forgot to mention in my OP) is that I have been getting a significant number of false negatives, due to the time out being set too low. But increasing the time out by just a few seconds causes the total runtime to increase dramatically, hence my need to look at something like threading. Cheers, Darren :)	[reply]
Re^3: Testing many devices - are threads the answer? by Herkum (Parson) on May 13, 2009 at 13:36 UTC
Chances were that timeouts would be a real issue especially for hardware. However, I mentioned this anyways because, no offense, too many people jump to a solution without understanding the problem. I wanted to suggest to ensure that at least someone think about this before heading down the wrong path.	[reply]