This version is slightly faster and much better on CPU time. My version wrecks the CPU. The only thing I need to do here is tweak this version to run with the same output as mine. I'll post the portion that actually runs the commands soon. I think something like this may make this tool run much better. Here is your code running with 1000 as max on the 7k+ servers:
real 0m56.481s user 0m2.515s sys 0m2.165s
Using my default fork value as max of 100:
real 1m26.502s user 0m2.537s sys 0m2.270s
In reply to Re^4: A question of fork efficiency
by synless
in thread A question of fork efficiency
by synless
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |