: Parallel vs Sequential
Like already mentioned, will *only* and *potentially* give
you a boost if you have a multi-CPUs machine, and/or a multi-disks
machine, and/or independent tasks, etc...
Don't expect much from on a single CPU PC... Like Conor
already told you, it enables use
Just think about it logically: if you
have a multi-proc machine with good disks then yes, you can see performance
improvements by building things in parallel. If you have a single-proc
machine with a rinky-dink 5400 RPM drive then no, chances are that you
won't see any performance benefit (and mig
Like already mentioned, will *only* and *potentially* give
you a boost if you have a multi-CPUs machine, and/or a multi-disks
machine, and/or independent tasks, etc...
Don't expect much from on a single CPU PC... Like Conor
already told you, it enables use cases impossible to do without
parallel
Hi Conor,
You had said that " was not intended as a performance
enhancer, but the ant manual says
Parallel tasks have a number of uses in an Ant build file including:
* Taking advantage of available processing resources to reduce build
time
Following example was also cited in the a
Any performance improvement using will depend significantly
on what you are doing in parallel and on what hardware resources your
platform provides.
For example, the tasks could be interacting in ways you don't
expect. Maybe these tasks block each other somehow. I have no idea.
In the end, wa
't improve performance.
-Original Message-
From: Shree [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2006 6:38 AM
To: Ant Users List
Subject: Parallel vs Sequential
Hi Stefan,
I tried evaluating the performance of " task" with sequential
way doing(without using ) a se
Hi Stefan,
I tried evaluating the performance of " task" with sequential
way doing(without using ) a set of tasks. I find
does not help to improve the performance much and infact it sometimes
even slower than sequential(as far I had experimented with some examples).
I did several examples.
