Can UNIX pipe connections be compiled?
Phil Rorex
rorex at locus.com
Thu Jan 24 13:28:12 AEST 1991
>In article <1991Jan18.193234.216 at rucs.runet.edu> Dana Eckart writes:
>>Does there exist a piece of software (or is it even possible) to compile
>>a pipe? In particular, suppose you had
>> ls -l | fgrep "Dec" | cut -f 4
>>is there anyway to compile the above pipeline so that the pieces can
>>communicate more quickly. I am looking for a general solution, not
>>one that works only for the above example.
>
>
>I don't see how. Any program that was created from the above line would
>have to do everything the shell does when it sees that line and that
>program has to be loaded and run as well. If anything such a program
>would slow it down.
>
>Just a thought BTW - are you running out of memory? If you are right
I agree. Don't overlook this. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>at the low limit you may be swapping when you get a large enough pipe.
>My motherboard died recently and I have been running on a borrowed one
>with less memory and I see a lot of slowdown with it. The swapping is
>quite noticeable.
>
>--
>D'Arcy J.M. Cain (darcy at druid) |
>D'Arcy Cain Consulting | There's no government
>West Hill, Ontario, Canada | like no government!
>+1 416 281 6094 |
I've split up many a long pipe because of excessive paging.
On a heavily loaded machine,
ls -l > /tmp/tmp.$$.1
fgrep "Dec" < /tmp/tmp.$$.1 > /tmp/tmp.$$.2
cut -f 4 < tmp.$$.2
rm /tmp/tmp.$$.[12] &
can get in and out before all the pieces of the pipeline
ls -l | fgrep "Dec" | cut -f 4
ever even get loaded in.
BTW, I've found egrep to be faster than fgrep on the paging unix's I've been
on for scenario's like yours. _ Your mileage may vary.
+1 213 337-5062 |_) |_ . | ...!{ucla-se|uunet}!lcc!rorex
Phillip Rorex | | ( | | rorex at locus.com
Disclaimer: I speak only for myself
--
_
+1 213 337-5062 |_) |_ . | ...!{ucla-se|uunet}!lcc!rorex
Phillip Rorex | | ( | | rorex at locus.com
Disclaimer: I speak only for myself
More information about the Comp.unix.questions
mailing list