On Wed, 08 Nov 2006 13:22:56 -0800, Robert Bradshaw
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> However small, it's still O(n).
>>
>> Yes but for a typically running SAGE program n is about 3-4, at most.
>> There's no reason in SAGE to launch numerous subprocesses.
> Maybe I'm just not used to the idea of h
On Wed, 8 Nov 2006, William Stein wrote:
> On Wed, 08 Nov 2006 07:27:39 -0800, Gonzalo Tornaria
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Nov 08, 2006 at 02:23:18AM -0800, William Stein wrote:
>>> Good question. Longterm there are a couple of issues:
>>>
>>> (1) How do you tell the monitor abo
On Wed, 08 Nov 2006 07:27:39 -0800, Gonzalo Tornaria
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 08, 2006 at 02:23:18AM -0800, William Stein wrote:
>> Good question. Longterm there are a couple of issues:
>>
>> (1) How do you tell the monitor about new processes that get spawned?
>> You
On Wed, 08 Nov 2006 03:32:53 -0800, Martin Albrecht
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> (5) The overhead is minimal -- it really is only 2MB to run a minimal
>> Python process.
>
> That can/should be reduced further either by moving this stuff to C or
> the
> bash.
I thought that too --
On Wed, Nov 08, 2006 at 02:23:18AM -0800, William Stein wrote:
> Good question. Longterm there are a couple of issues:
>
> (1) How do you tell the monitor about new processes that get spawned?
> You could put that info in a temp file, but that feels a little
> clunky.
You can read
> (5) The overhead is minimal -- it really is only 2MB to run a minimal
> Python process.
That can/should be reduced further either by moving this stuff to C or the
bash.
Also, I'm under the impression that the whole zombie thing is a regression.
E.g., whenever I now kill a Gröbner bas
On Wed, 08 Nov 2006 01:25:02 -0800, Robert Bradshaw
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> This probably has an easy answer, but why not have a single process
> that monitors all children processes (instead of one per child).
Good question. Longterm there are a couple of issues:
(1) How do you tel
This probably has an easy answer, but why not have a single process
that monitors all children processes (instead of one per child).
Robert
On Nov 8, 2006, at 1:17 AM, William Stein wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I wrote an interesting little Python script, which I think will
> totally
> solve our "bad p
