On Thu, 04 Aug 2011 10:59:58 -0500, Stan Hoeppner wrote: > On 8/4/2011 10:34 AM, Walter Hurry wrote: >> On Thu, 04 Aug 2011 16:28:41 +0100, Darac Marjal wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Aug 04, 2011 at 10:23:08PM +0800, lina wrote: >>>> Thanks for suggestions, >>>> >>>> Actually I got a job which contains several small jobs inside. >>>> >>>> if run the bash script, it will do those one by one and it is pretty >>>> slow, waiting ... >>>> >>>> I can run each small jobs separately, but use a bash script kind of >>>> easy to make some changes in amount and manage. >>>> >>>> I just wonder are there some simple way to do it? >>> >>> What you could try is converting your bash script to a makefile, you >>> can then let make do the work of parallelizing your jobs with "make -j >>> 8 -f yourmakefile". >> >> That's a clever use of make. Wish I'd thought of that! > > Simply backgrounding the processes in the existing shell script is > easier. Using the make file option is simply extra work with no gain. I > do know of other cases where the make file option is better. Just not > this case.
OK, fair point. Nevertheless, I must try to remember that make is for lists of interdependent tasks, not just for compiling programs and so forth. Darac's suggestion (as far as I am concerned) is a good example of lateral thinking, even if it may not be the optimal solution in this particular case. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/j1eg23$rk4$1...@dough.gmane.org
