"Luis Alberto Zarrabeitia Gomez" <ky...@uh.cu> wrote: >Quoting Hendrik van Rooyen <m...@microcorp.co.za>:
>> In fact I happen to believe that anything that does any work needs >> one and only one input queue and nothing else, but I am peculiar >> that way. > >Well, I also need some output. In my case, the outputs are files with the result >of the processing, that can be summarized later (hence the need to 'join' the >processes, to know when I can summarize them). When you know what you want to do with the output (which I suspect is your case) then the trick is to put the individual outputs onto the input queue of the summary process. This will form a virtual (or real if you have different machines) systolic array with producers feeding consumers that feed the summary process, all running concurrently. Ponder on it that in the description only the word "feed" is used... And if you don't know where your output must go, then it must be put onto the input queue of your default router, who must know what to do with stuff. - this is in a sense what happens when you pipe stdout to stdin in a *nix environment - you use the OS to set up a temporary systolic array. You only need to keep the output of the consumers in files if you need access to it later for some reason. In your case it sounds as if you are only interested in the output of the summary. - Hendrik -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
