× The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.



Thanks Peter!
Changing Standard C functions to POSIX did make an improvement and as you
said the program finished much faster. The highest CPU percentage it reached
was 79% as opposed to 91%.
The internal buffer in Standard C functions was a real revelation to me. Any
other hidden gems out of your sleeve :)?
I'm just wondering... The program is doing multiple I/O operations.
Shouldn't an I/O operation release the CPU?


Jevgeni,
It's only a psychological problem until the operator puts the job on hold
because he thinks it's in infinite loop :)
Then it becomes a real problem, because the business unit thinks that other
business jobs will get less CPU.
There seems to be a consensus in this thread that high CPU is pretty much
normal. I'm just having hard time explaining it and I think I will be forced
to put the job in a different class with a lower runtime priority.
Thanks for the code. I'll definitely try it.



As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...

Follow-Ups:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.