Re: PROPOSAL to serialize cron.{daily,weekly,monthly}

[Carlos Sousa <csousa@tvtel.pt>]

On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 21:23:38 +0200 Thomas Hood wrote:
> On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 20:10:07 +0200, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> > On Sun, Sep 05, 2004 at 06:54:34PM +0100, Carlos Sousa wrote:
> >> On Sun, 5 Sep 2004 10:47:35 -0500 Steve Greenland wrote:
> >> > [...]
> >> > (... If the general consensus is that
> >> > chaining the daily->weekly->monthly jobs is a good idea, I'll happily
> >> > make the changes in the cron package.)
> >> 
> >> I would say this serialization is a good idea and worth the effort, on the
> >> basis of system load and machine stress considerations alone.
> > 
> > The opposite is true on hardware capable of true parallel
> > operation. So once again that appears to be a matter for local
> > configuration.

OK. But then there is still the problem of conflicting concurrent jobs...

> There remains the question of what the default should be.
> 
> Would serialized execution be significantly better for the vast
> majority of systems out there?  If so then it might be worth
> implementing the idea.

All major consumer pc stores here carry mostly (only?) single-processor
machines. All computers I personally know about (mine, friends', of schools
and other institutions/companies I've worked in or visited) are also in
this category, and most are even reasonably recent machines. We're still
a bit far from parallell hardware for the masses ;)

-- 
Carlos Sousa
http://vbc.dyndns.org/