On 31/01/2012 03:19, Cam Hutchison wrote:
seq 0 108 | xargs -I@ -P8 cat A_@.txt B_@.txt C_@.txt -o ABC_@.txt
Of course, this is (since cat -o doesn't exist):
seq 0 108 | xargs -I@ -P8 cat A_@.txt B_@.txt C_@.txt ABC_@.txt
but ABC_@.txt is out of the scope of xargs.
Nicolas
--
To
What about the use of ulimit or any other tool that your sysadmin could control?
On the other hand, these solutions seem ok:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1537956/bash-limit-the-number-of-concurrent-jobs
Nicolas
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a
I need time to understand the suggestions have been given.
A quick thanks.
Best regards,
On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 12:10 AM, Nicolas Bercher nberc...@yahoo.fr wrote:
What about the use of ulimit or any other tool that your sysadmin could
control?
On the other hand, these solutions seem ok:
On 1 Feb, 2012, at 1:19, Nicolas Bercher nberc...@yahoo.fr wrote:
On 31/01/2012 17:22, lina wrote:
I need time to understand the suggestions have been given.
Yes, of course. But this may interest other pepole on the list since your
topic since to be of great interest for others, including
lina lina.lastn...@gmail.com writes:
I have a script like
#!/bin/bash
for i in {0..108}
do
some job will run for mins
done
Here I used for some kinda of parallel.
but there is a problem,
I wished at most it only run 8 jobs simultantly, no more than 8, once
finished, a new job
Hi,
( sorry if it a bit off-topic)
I have a script like
#!/bin/bash
for i in {0..108}
do
some job will run for mins
done
Here I used for some kinda of parallel.
but there is a problem,
I wished at most it only run 8 jobs simultantly, no more than 8, once
finished, a new job can continue,
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 6:06 PM, lina lina.lastn...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
( sorry if it a bit off-topic)
I have a script like
#!/bin/bash
for i in {0..108}
do
some job will run for mins
done
Here I used for some kinda of parallel.
but there is a problem,
I wished at most it
lina:
I wished at most it only run 8 jobs simultantly, no more than 8, once
finished, a new job can continue,
Xargs can be used for this. An exmaple:
$ seq 1 100 | xargs -n1 -P8 echo
Seq prints the numbers from 1 to 100 (one per line) and xargs starts an
echo for each argument with 8
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 6:35 PM, Jochen Spieker m...@well-adjusted.de wrote:
lina:
I wished at most it only run 8 jobs simultantly, no more than 8, once
finished, a new job can continue,
Xargs can be used for this. An exmaple:
$ seq 1 100 | xargs -n1 -P8 echo
Seq prints the numbers from
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 06:06:06PM +0800, lina wrote:
I have a script like
#!/bin/bash
for i in {0..108}
do
some job will run for mins
done
Here I used for some kinda of parallel.
but there is a problem,
I wished at most it only run 8 jobs simultantly, no more than 8, once
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 06:06:06PM +0800, lina wrote:
Hi,
( sorry if it a bit off-topic)
I have a script like
#!/bin/bash
for i in {0..108}
do
some job will run for mins
done
Here I used for some kinda of parallel.
but there is a problem,
I wished at most it only run 8
lina:
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 6:35 PM, Jochen Spieker m...@well-adjusted.de wrote:
lina:
I wished at most it only run 8 jobs simultantly, no more than 8, once
finished, a new job can continue,
Xargs can be used for this. An exmaple:
$ seq 1 100 | xargs -n1 -P8 echo
Seq prints the
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 10:08 PM, Chen Wei weichen...@gmx.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 06:06:06PM +0800, lina wrote:
I have a script like
#!/bin/bash
for i in {0..108}
do
some job will run for mins
done
Here I used for some kinda of parallel.
but there is a problem,
I wished
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 10:11 PM, Darac Marjal mailingl...@darac.org.uk wrote:
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 06:06:06PM +0800, lina wrote:
Hi,
( sorry if it a bit off-topic)
I have a script like
#!/bin/bash
for i in {0..108}
do
some job will run for mins
done
Here I used for some
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 10:29 PM, Jochen Spieker m...@well-adjusted.de wrote:
lina:
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 6:35 PM, Jochen Spieker m...@well-adjusted.de
wrote:
lina:
I wished at most it only run 8 jobs simultantly, no more than 8, once
finished, a new job can continue,
Xargs can be used
lina:
well, a question,
$ seq 0 3 | xargs --verbose echo A
echo A 0 1 2 3
A 0 1 2 3
How can I make the output as:
A0 A1 A2 A3
Your problem in this case is that xargs adds whitespace before adding
arguments. What you can do is to modify seq's output before xargs sees
it:
$ seq 0 3 |
On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 12:05 AM, Jochen Spieker m...@well-adjusted.de wrote:
lina:
well, a question,
$ seq 0 3 | xargs --verbose echo A
echo A 0 1 2 3
A 0 1 2 3
How can I make the output as:
A0 A1 A2 A3
Your problem in this case is that xargs adds whitespace before adding
arguments.
lina:
Yes. the ultimate goal is:
for i in {0..108}
do
cat A_$i.txt B_$i.txt C_$i.txt -o ABC_$i.txt (output as ABC_$i.txt)
done
Ok, so you don't actually have only A_$i filenames, but B_$i and C_$i as
well. That alone makes my previous approach useless (as I predicted!).
The other
On 20120130_223623, Jochen Spieker wrote:
lina:
Yes. the ultimate goal is:
for i in {0..108}
do
cat A_$i.txt B_$i.txt C_$i.txt -o ABC_$i.txt (output as ABC_$i.txt)
done
Ok, so you don't actually have only A_$i filenames, but B_$i and C_$i as
well. That alone makes my previous
lina lina.lastn...@gmail.com writes:
Yes. the ultimate goal is:
for i in {0..108}
do
cat A_$i.txt B_$i.txt C_$i.txt -o ABC_$i.txt (output as ABC_$i.txt)
done
but here I wish to use only 8 processors at most, total is 16.
the administrator of the cluster asked me not to use whole, cause
someone
20 matches
Mail list logo
