That all makes sense.
Thanks for the quick response, Tom. I appreciate it.
-Mike
======================
Mike Zuranski
Meteorology Support Analyst
College of DuPage - Nexlab
Weather.cod.edu <http://weather.cod.edu/>
======================
On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 2:15 PM Tom Yoksas <yoksas@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Mike,
>
> On 4/23/20 12:39 PM, Mike Zuranski wrote:
> > I'm wondering if there is a difference in speed/efficiency of the LDM,
> > or in system resource allocation, between grouping all my pqact
> > statements in one file vs. splitting them up into different pqact
> > files.
>
> Since all actions in an LDM pattern-action file are processed
> sequentially, there is a benefit to distributing actions in multiple
> pattern-action files that are each processed by a separate 'pqact'
> instance.
>
> re:
> > Does LDM do anything differently or is it a wash either way?
>
> No, each 'pqact' instance will work through the list of actions in
> the pattern-action file that it works in sequence. So, if one has
> a monolithic pattern-action file with, say 10K actions, it will take
> significantly longer than having 10 'pqact' instances operating
> on pattern-action files that each have 100 actions.
>
> re:
> > I vaguely remember this coming up at one point but I couldn't find any
> > documentation or old email threads about it. I'm mostly just asking out
> > of curiosity, I don't have a specific problem that I'm trying to solve
> > or anything. But if I were to redo my pqact organization I'm wondering
> > if there is a preferred methodology.
>
> The best rule of thumb is to have multiple 'pqact' instances operating
> on multiple pattern-action files when the list of actions to be
> performed is large, or when some of the actions are slow. There is no
> "best practice" for, say, having only N actions in a pattern-action
> file since the speed that the actions will be performed is a function
> of how fast/slow each action is. Sites invariably will need to do
> their own tuning to find the right balance of speed and use of
> resources (more 'pqact' instances will, of course, use more resources
> like CPU, RAM, etc.).
>
> Cheers,
>
> Tom
> --
> +----------------------------------------------------------------------+
> * Tom Yoksas UCAR Unidata Program *
> * (303) 497-8642 (last resort) P.O. Box 3000 *
> * yoksas@xxxxxxxx Boulder, CO 80307 *
> * Unidata WWW Service http://www.unidata.ucar.edu/ *
> +----------------------------------------------------------------------+
>
> _______________________________________________
> NOTE: All exchanges posted to Unidata maintained email lists are
> recorded in the Unidata inquiry tracking system and made publicly
> available through the web. Users who post to any of the lists we
> maintain are reminded to remove any personal information that they
> do not want to be made public.
>
>
> ldm-users mailing list
> ldm-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> For list information or to unsubscribe, visit:
> https://www.unidata.ucar.edu/mailing_lists/
>
