Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

6
  • Is there some way you could treat the Message Queue as a seq and then just use pmap to get the parallelization? Commented Apr 8, 2010 at 21:58
  • @Alex Stoddard: In my case, process-queue-item actually blocks on network IO, so I don't think pmap is the right choice since it only uses as many threads as the machine has cores. Commented Apr 8, 2010 at 23:01
  • @erikw: Sure, but that is just a pmap implementation detail (threads = #cores + 2). No reason you couldn't write a version of pmap with a parameterized number of threads. See the first line of the pmap source: (let [n (+ 2 (.. Runtime getRuntime availableProcessors)) Commented Apr 9, 2010 at 14:29
  • Hi, I have several questions: 1. agents have a value, are you interested in their value or are you just using it as a threadpool? 2. is there a final result to the queue consumption or does process-queue-item perform side-effects? Commented Apr 12, 2010 at 12:59
  • @cgrand: 1) I'm not interested in the value of the agents, just using them as a threadpool. 2) process-queue-item has seid-effects (pushes results back out to a Message Queue). Commented Apr 13, 2010 at 2:11