Steven W. Orr wrote:
This is a classic question: How to run something on a periodic basis that
may take longer to execute than the interval between the next occurance.
Think of it not as a task that needs to be run at an interval so much as a
task that needs to be rescheduled after it
Bill McGonigle [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
A random orbit sander with 30 or 60 grit velcro discs could
be the basis for an automated platter eater, if you're feeling creative.
Hmm, velcro the disk to the bottom of the random orbital sander, and
sand down a cinder block...
--
Seeya,
Paul
On Friday, Mar 7th 2008 at 07:49 -, quoth Kent Johnson:
=Steven W. Orr wrote:
= This is a classic question: How to run something on a periodic basis that
= may take longer to execute than the interval between the next occurance.
= Think of it not as a task that needs to be run at an interval
Steven W. Orr wrote:
Still sounds like a job for at, no?
I don't see it. I have monthly, weekly and daily jobs that I want to run
sequentially, in that order, starting at 8pm. How would I do that using
'at'? Preferably without making the actual jobs know about each other,
e.g. not teaching
You can also use dotlockfile, lockfile, or dotlock to create a lock file
for each task that is running. Then have the 'daily' script kick off the
right process for whichever lockfile is not there.
Of course, the task has to remove the lock file when its done.
--Bruce
Kent Johnson wrote:
Steven
Kent Johnson wrote:
I made a combined job that basically does this:
if it is the first of the month:
run monthly job and wait for completion
if it is Saturday:
run the weekly job and wait for completion
run the daily job
The combined job is scheduled for 8pm execution with cron.
I don't see it. I have monthly, weekly and daily jobs that I want
to run sequentially, in that order, starting at 8pm. How would
I do that using 'at'? Preferably without making the actual jobs
know about each other, e.g. not teaching the weekly job that it
should be followed by the
Michael ODonnell writes:
Of course, synchronization-wise things get interesting as soon
as any job takes longer than the hourly interval because the next
hour's queue-runner has to know not to interfere with the one that's
still active. A lock-file should be enough to handle that, though.
